Next Article in Journal
Triple Bottom Line Scenario Sites as Boundary Objects for Integrating Diverse Disciplines in Convergent Research
Previous Article in Journal
Digital Economy, Logistics Development, and the Increase in Farmers’ Income: An Empirical Analysis of the Eastern Economic Region of China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 23
10.3390/su162310428
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Sustainable Energy Development: Reviewing Carbon Emission Reduction in Photovoltaic Power Systems

by
Ailing Wang
1,
Qiongfang Lin
1,
Chunlu Liu
2,
Liu Yang
1 and
Shaonan Sun
3,*
1
School of Management, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China
2
School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University Geelong Waterfront Campus, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
3
School of Water Conservancy, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(23), 10428; https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310428
Submission received: 13 November 2024 / Revised: 21 November 2024 / Accepted: 26 November 2024 / Published: 28 November 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
As a driving force of sustainable energy development, photovoltaic power is instrumental in diminishing greenhouse gas emissions and is vital for achieving our targets for a sustainable energy future. Therefore, a systematic review of carbon emission reduction in photovoltaic power systems (CERPPS) is very important for a deeper understanding and advancing the development in this field. This study leverages the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection as a primary database and applies VOSviewer and CiteSpace tools to perform a bibliometric analysis of publications related to CERPPS, spanning from 2006 to June 2024. This study has elucidated the research progress from both a quantitative and visual perspective and delineated the evolution of research hotspots. Analysis of the results is done on the basis of annual publications, authorship, institutional affiliations, national origins, journal publications, references, and keywords. The analysis indicates that recycling, the large-scale deployment of photovoltaic modules, energy storage management within photovoltaic power systems, and large-scale deployment of photovoltaic power systems are hot topics. Future research trends encompass the study of new photovoltaic materials, life cycle assessment and recycling, and the development of smart photovoltaic power systems. This study provides an overview of the evolution of CERPPS’s main research directions, which establishes a reference framework for scholars to get a deeper insight into the most recent advancements and research outlooks within CERPPS, and also fosters the advancement of photovoltaic power systems towards a more low-carbon and sustainable trajectory.

1. Introduction

Industrialization and globalization have spurred economic growth, increased productivity, and improved living standards [1,2]. However, they have also led to a significant rise in energy demand and a larger carbon footprint, which represents a threat to all living beings on Earth. Data from the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2022) indicate that in 2022, the electricity and heat sector experienced the fastest growth in global carbon emissions, with an increase of 1.8% [3]. Therefore, a shift towards a more sustainable energy structure is necessary. As a driving force behind sustainable energy development, photovoltaic power generation is experiencing continuous growth in its market size. By 2023, the global installed capacity of photovoltaic modules had exceeded 1 terawatt peak (TWp) [4]. As the demand for installed photovoltaic power capacity increases in regions such as Southeast Asia, North America, Europe, and Latin America, it is anticipated that the installed capacity will continue to grow in the future. However, there is also a need to reduce carbon emissions over the life cycle of the whole photovoltaic power system. Although photovoltaic power has the potential to reduce carbon emissions substantially, the production of photovoltaic modules is energy-intensive and results in substantial carbon emissions [5]. Within the photovoltaic supply chain, upstream stages, such as polysilicon and silicon wafers, and the midstream stages, such as batteries and modules, account for more than 90% of carbon emissions. Consequently, it is imperative to reduce photovoltaic power carbon emissions by technical measures.
Numerous researchers have already conducted studies on carbon emission reduction in photovoltaic power systems (CERPPS). In policymaking, the formulation of policies plays a crucial role in promoting carbon emission reductions, encompassing supportive measures for technological advancements, the substitution of low carbon electricity, and the facilitation of the shift towards a low-carbon economy [6]. The government’s support of renewables, in particular by means of Renewable Portfolio Standards and carbon taxation policies, is a powerful instrument to support the low-carbon energy transition [7]. Carbon trading policies can also enhance energy efficiency by affecting environmental conservation investments, electricity consumption, and the composition of the industrial sector [8]. Photovoltaic power systems, as part of the electricity supply, are directly affected by related carbon policies in terms of their energy efficiency and carbon emissions. Through policy guidance and constraints, it is possible to increase energy efficiency and decrease the carbon footprint associated with photovoltaic power systems. Moreover, by combining policy guidance with technological improvements, it is possible to significantly increase the energy efficiency of photovoltaic power systems and to decrease their carbon emissions. In terms of technological improvements, photovoltaic power systems are gradually shifting from traditional, high-energy consumption production technologies to low-carbon and high-efficiency ones. They are evolving from standalone systems to more diverse configurations, including grid-connected systems [9,10], off-grid systems [11], and hybrid systems [12,13,14]. Simultaneously, by optimizing battery components [15], concentrating techniques [16], and photothermal technologies [17], not only has the performance of photovoltaic power been improved, costs reduced, and conversion rates increased, but also energy consumption and carbon emissions have been decreased. In terms of cost–benefit analysis, the optimization of the photovoltaic power system’s production line scale is achieved through the analysis of the payback period of energy investments, greenhouse gas emissions, and the external costs associated with photovoltaic technology, leading to improved efficiency and reduced carbon emissions. Regarding the evaluation of cost versus benefit, it is possible to optimize the production lines of a photovoltaic power system by analyzing the payback period of energy investment, greenhouse gas emissions, and external costs related to photovoltaic power technologies, resulting in higher efficiency and lower carbon emissions. For example, an economic analysis of the profitability of solar panels, for instance, has shown that mono-Si and poly-Si will pay for PV systems in around 5.8 to 5.9 years, whereas a-Si will be repaid in 9.1 years [18]. This comparative analysis informs the selection of photovoltaic modules within the photovoltaic power system, thereby reducing production costs and enhancing system efficiency. Through the above research, it can be known that research on CERPPS is not only a direct response to environmental protection and climate change but also a crucial factor for achieving global energy transformation, sustainable economic development, and improved human well-being. Therefore, enhancing research and the application of CERPPS is indispensable for building a green, low-carbon future.
However, CERPPS is an interdisciplinary field, encompassing areas such as policymaking, technological innovation, cost management, and energy efficiency enhancement. Despite the extensive research in these areas, a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the current literature on CERPPS is still missing. This indicates that a comprehensive and integrated synthesis of the existing CERPPS research is required. This synthesis will improve the overall understanding of these measures and make it easier to implement them so that the photovoltaic industry can not only achieve clean energy targets but also make a significant contribution to the broader objective of carbon neutrality worldwide. Bibliometric analysis offers a numerical approach to assessing and scrutinizing the scholarly works within a particular domain [19], providing support for the current study.
Bibliometrics encompasses two primary procedures: performance analysis and science mapping [20]. Bibliometric tools such as CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix can visually represent the statistical data derived from academic documents [21]. There is no consensus regarding the most effective method among the available bibliographic software tools [22]. Nevertheless, VOSviewer provides a plethora of advanced features suitable for the construction of diverse bibliometric networks [23]. CiteSpace is capable of tracing the development trajectory of a specific research topic by employing keyword analysis [24]. Furthermore, both VOSviewer and CiteSpace are offered at no cost [25]. Consequently, this study utilized VOSviewer (1.6.19) and CiteSpace (6.3.R1) software to perform co-citation analysis, co-authorship analysis, and keyword analysis on the literature concerning carbon emission reduction in photovoltaic power systems between 2006 and June 2024, thereby identifying the research hotspots and frontiers within CERPPS. The primary questions explored in the study include the following:
(1)
What are the research hotspots in the study of CERPPS?
(2)
What are the research frontiers in the study of CERPPS?
(3)
What challenges and opportunities might the future hold for CERPPS?
This study initially filtered the literature on CERPPS from the Web of Science’s Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases, which covered the period from 2006 to June 2024. Subsequently, tools like VOSviewer and CiteSpace were utilized to perform analyses of co-citations, collaborations, and keywords on the filtered dataset. Ultimately, the research frontiers and hot topics within the field of CERPPS were summarized. The innovation of this study resides in its first systematic organization and synthesis of carbon emission reduction research in photovoltaic power systems, offering a research perspective and approach for the low-carbon development of such systems.

2. Methodology

Since research on photovoltaic power systems for cutting carbon emissions is quite spread out and not well organized, this study has conducted a systematic investigation into this problem. The specific procedures of this process are depicted in Figure 1. The research initially carefully selected literature related to CERPPS from the WOS Core Collection database, which served as the data foundation for the study. To thoroughly explore the internal relationships and research trends within this literature, two widely used bibliometric analysis tools were utilized: VOSviewer and CiteSpace. VOSviewer was employed for co-authorship analysis, which included institution co-authorship, country/region co-authorship, and author co-authorship analysis, and it identified the top ten most active entities in these collaborative networks. Furthermore, VOSviewer was also used for co-citation analysis, which enabled the identification of journals and literature with significant impact and the top twenty key metrics of these entities to be obtained through journal co-citation analysis and document co-citation analysis. CiteSpace was used for analyzing publication trends and keyword analysis. With CiteSpace, it was possible to track the co-occurrence patterns of keywords and uncover emerging research hotspots. These analyses not only help scholars understand how research related to CERPPS has evolved and predict future research directions, but they also provide valuable guidance for planning future scientific research and allocating resources.
In data collection, the research by Mongeon and Paul-Hus indicates that most bibliometric analyses share a common data source: Thomson Reuters’s Web of Science and Elsevier’s Scopus [26]. However, WOS has a wide range of data sources [27], as well as the high-quality cross-disciplinary “SCI-E” and “SSCI” [28]. Besides, WOS has groundbreaking content, high-quality data, and a lengthy history, and it also outperforms Scopus in terms of article classification accuracy [29]. Therefore, the SCI-E and SSCI of the WOS were chosen to extract the data used in the analysis. Due to the fact that journal articles often have more in-depth research and are more informative than other publications [30], the selected literature comprises research articles and review articles. Furthermore, considering English is the most widely used academic language, the publication language is set to English. The period under consideration ranges from 2006 to the end of June 2024.
As shown in Figure 2, the data collection process of this study was divided into three main stages. The initial stage encompassed the literature search, where 18,675 documents were initially identified by searching for literature that contained both Topic 1 and Topic 2 in the SCI-E and SSCI databases from January 2006 to June 2024. The second stage was the studied excluded phase, during which 131 non-English documents and 778 non-research or non-review articles were removed, leaving a final total of 18,544 documents. The third stage was the manual screening phase, in which the rest of the papers were carefully reviewed, including the headings, abstracts, and key words. It removed 906 papers that clearly do not fit within the scope of the CERPPS research, 16,467 papers that were not related to the research topic, and 33 papers that the researchers could not access. After these screening steps, a final set of 360 relevant documents was determined. Finally, the pertinent information, encompassing titles, institutions, abstracts, keywords, authors’ names, and citation details, was extracted in plain text form from the WOS database.

3. Bibliometric Analysis of the Publication

A dataset of 360 records identified during the course of this study was analyzed. The dataset includes 1335 authors affiliated with 559 institutions in 62 countries. These findings are based on 97 journal papers and 16,020 citations from 6759 academic articles. This section analyzes the basic characteristics of publications, including the publication trends, the authors of publications, the distribution of institutions, the distribution of countries/regions, the journals published, and the co-citations of documents, using the visualization tool VOSviewer.

3.1. Publication Trends

Figure 3 shows the annual scientific results from CERPPS research conducted between 2006 and June 2024. In the early years (2006–2009), the number of publications was low, with 2006 having the most. Later, as a result of the United Nations Climate Change Summit, the “Climate Ambition Summit,” and the signing of the Paris Agreement, there was a significant impact on the policies concerning energy efficiency and carbon emission mitigation among countries [31,32,33], not only launching human action to combat global warming [32] but also sparking the research interest of experts and scholars from various countries in CERPPS. Thus, since 2010, there has been a steady increase in the number of publications up to June 2024. There was a noticeable spike in publication numbers in 2017, 2020, 2022, and 2023, likely due to the impact of summits. However, a decline in the number of publications from 2023 to June 2024 is observed, mainly because 2024 is not fully concluded and some publications are yet to be indexed. Despite this, the overall trend reflects a growing interest and research in CERRPPS within the academic community.

3.2. Author Analysis

Author co-citation occurs when multiple authors are referenced within the same paper. This type of analysis assists in pinpointing authors who have garnered substantial citations and facilitates the examination of their interdisciplinary expertise and research areas [25]. After collating the data, only 142 of the 1335 writers who published CERPPS publications wrote two or more papers, accounting for 10.64%. Therefore, to conduct a more representative analysis of authors related to CERPPS research, the minimum standard for the number of referenced sources and citations was set at 2. Figure 4 illustrates the maximum connected network of 142 authors. In the network diagram, nodes represent authors, and connecting lines denote co-referencing relationships. A larger node size in the network represents a higher citation frequency for the author, mirroring a more significant impact. As seen in Figure 4a, the author co-authorship network is predominantly composed of isolated subnetworks, implying that authors collaborate extensively in groups. The subnetwork led by Ilke Celik, consisting of 10 nodes, exhibits the highest connection strength, as illustrated in Figure 4b. The subnetwork formed by Enrica Leccisi, Vasilis Fthenakis, Vasilis M. Fthenakis, Garvin A. Heath, and Joseph D. Bergesen, comprising 28 nodes, represents the network with the broadest cooperation scope, as indicated in Figure 4c.
Table 1 displays the top 10 authors with the highest publication frequency. Clearly, Ilke Celik stands out as the most active author, having published 7 papers with a citation count of 390 times. The second most active author is Nieves Espinosa, who has published 6 papers. Authors ranked third to tenth each have published 5 papers. Notably, while Vasilis Fthenakis has published two fewer papers than Ilke Celik, his publications have received a total of 407 citations, averaging 81.40 citations per article. This has made him a highly influential figure in CERPPS-related research. Considering Figure 4, authors with a substantial number of publications engage in close cooperation, while the research of other scholars remains relatively independent, forming a close cooperation network only within their respective groups.

3.3. Institution Analysis

Publications were from 559 research institutions. The top 10 most productive institutions, according to their publications, are shown in Table 2. Together, these top 10 institutions collectively contributed 85 publications, accounting for 23.61% of the total (360). The institution with the most publications was the Chinese Academy of Sciences, with 14 articles. Subsequently, Columbia University had 11 publications, followed by Brookhaven National Laboratory with 10 publications. It is significant to mention that Brookhaven National Laboratory, although it holds the third position in publication count, tops the list in terms of total citations and the average citations per publication. Brookhaven National Laboratory is a hub of innovation in the photovoltaic sector. Their research focuses on enhancing solar cell efficiency and creating novel photoelectric materials. This work is pivotal for advancing solar technology and supporting sustainable energy use, which is essential for cutting down carbon emissions. Furthermore, Table 2’s third column (Country/Region) reveals that the USA and China are central to the publication of CERPPS-related research. This underscores the substantial R&D proficiency and robust research capacity of both nations within the field of CERPPS.
This study employed VOSviewer’s co-author analysis tool to construct a collaborative network map, providing an in-depth analysis of the relationships among academic institutions, as depicted in Figure 5. Each node within the collaborative network map symbolizes an academic institution, with size indicative of the institution’s publication output. The collaborative network map’s connections and line thicknesses denote the extent and intensity of collaboration—more connections signify broader cooperation, while thicker lines suggest more intensive relationships. The collaborative network map uses distinct colors to denote various collaboration clusters, facilitating the reader’s quick identification of institutions belonging to the same group. As can be analyzed in Figure 5, these institutions exhibit a more fragmented cooperation, often clustering in smaller groups without extensive interaction among themselves. Moreover, the analysis of institutional countries shows that the majority of inter-agency collaborations take place within national boundaries, with relatively little international institutional cooperation. Therefore, to foster advancements in CERPPS research and broaden the scope of collaboration and dialogue, it is imperative to enhance institutional partnerships among key contributors like the USA, China, and The Netherlands.

3.4. Country/Region Analysis

A country’s research impact in specific fields is strongly connected to its publication volume. Table 3 lists the top 10 countries/regions with the highest publishing volumes. The USA has the highest publication volume (89 articles, 24.72% of total) and the total citation count, indicating a leading position in the CERPPS research. China has the second-highest publication volume (21.67% of total) but ranks 7th in citations per article, suggesting room for improvement in literature quality. Despite publishing fewer articles, India has the most often-cited articles. India’s extensive research on photovoltaic component life cycles, from production to scrap management and carbon emissions, has advanced carbon emission reduction strategies in solar energy and contributed to the global response to climate change. Table 3 ranks the top 10 countries/regions based on their cumulative photovoltaic installation capacity for the year 2022. All countries/regions in Table 3, except for the UK, the Netherlands, and France, are in Table 4. It is evident that the findings of this study align well with the real-world scenario. Moreover, all of the countries/regions listed in Table 3 are developed, with the exceptions of China and India. At present, it is only the developed countries along with a handful of developing nations that have the capacity to undertake such studies.
Figure 6 shows a map of the country/regional co-authorship network in the CERPPS research area. Every node signifies a country, and the node’s magnitude corresponds to the quantity of papers issued by that country. The collaborative network map’s connections and line thicknesses denote the extent and intensity of collaboration—more connections signify broader cooperation, while thicker lines suggest more intensive relationships. Evidently, the cooperation between countries/regions with the highest number of publications is relatively close. Leading in international cooperation on CERPPS-related research, the USA has extensive connections with other countries and the highest number of co-authored articles. Following closely, China exhibits strong cooperation with the USA, England, and Australia. It ranks second in the number of co-authored articles and collaborating countries. Further analysis shows that the United States and China dominate CERPPS-related publications, surpassing all other countries. This can be attributed to the major contributions made by Chinese and American researchers in this subject.

3.5. Journal Co-Citation Analysis

Table 5 shows the 20 leading journals in impact. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews holds the top position as the most popular journal, with 1100 citations. Research in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews primarily focuses on innovations and experiments in renewable and sustainable energy. Progress in Photovoltaics, dedicated to advancements in photovoltaic technology, secures the second position with a citation frequency of 825. Research topics in the journal encompass enhancements in solar cell efficiency, improvements in system performance, and advancements in electronic hardware design associated with significant progress in photovoltaics. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, ranking third in popularity, concentrates on material science and technology studies pertaining to solar energy conversion through photovoltaic, photothermal, and photoelectrochemical means. At its most inclusive, materials science addresses the physical, chemical, and optical aspects, along with the fabrication and analysis of materials. It can be seen that some journals are able to organically combine their research despite their different content, revealing the strong linkages and multidisciplinary character of the CERPPS-related journals (interdependence and cross-relationships).
Figure 7 depicts the co-citation network of the top 40 influential journals. Each node symbolizes a journal, with its size reflecting the journal’s prominence. Lines connecting nodes represent co-citation links, and line thickness signifies the intensity of these relationships. The figure distinctly shows that leading journals like Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews are closely connected to others, including Progress in Photovoltaics, Solar Energy, and Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells. This connection not only reflects teamwork in scientific advancement but also signifies a collaborative endeavor to address challenges related to energy sustainability and environmental impact.

3.6. Document Co-Citation Analysis

Co-citation analysis of document is a valuable method for pinpointing pertinent sources in interdisciplinary research and tracing the development of various fields of study [34,35]. In VOSViewer, documents with the highest citations and influence were filtered by establishing a citation minimum of 18. Out of 16,020 articles, 56 met this criterion, as depicted in Figure 8. Nodes represent the cited document, marked by the lead author’s name and publication year. Node size is indicative of the document’s importance. Colors differentiate between various collaboration clusters. Lines between nodes represent co-citation links within the network, and line thickness reflects the strength of these co-citation ties between the papers.
Upon analysis of Figure 8, it was discovered that all highly cited papers in CERPPS-related studies are interconnected by citation links. This phenomenon suggests that the research on CERPPS exhibits a high level of intertextuality, indicating that the work of the researchers is closely linked and interdependent. This indicates that the research is sharing a common theoretical framework, methodology, or dataset, which provides a consistent foundation for the study of CERPPS. The existence of such an interconnected academic network highlights the collaborative nature and cohesiveness of the research efforts. Each study contributes to the formation of a unified body of knowledge.
Table 6 presents the top 20 most-cited publications, including their rank, principal author, citation totals, publication dates, journal source, and keywords. After analyzing Table 6, it is found that the studies concentrate on the energy efficiency and environmental effects of photovoltaic power systems, employing the LCA methodology to examine all stages from manufacturing to disposal. They analyze different photovoltaic technologies, including crystalline silicon, CdTe, and CIS, focusing on energy payback time and greenhouse gas emissions, while also assessing recycling potential and the effects of technological advancements on system performance. Additionally, some studies conduct in-depth research on photovoltaic power systems in specific regions, with documents 8 and 10 specifically looking at systems in Switzerland and China to demonstrate how regional characteristics can influence the life cycle assessment of photovoltaic power systems. In summary, these studies furnish a scientific foundation for choosing and refining photovoltaic technologies, and they also present valuable insights for policymakers regarding the mitigation of environmental effects from photovoltaic power systems.

4. Systematic Analysis of Keywords in the Publication

Keywords are the fundamental components of a research article that effectively summarize the subject matter of a specific field [56]. Keywords assist readers in gaining a clearer understanding of the overall development of the topic and enable a rapid grasp of the literature’s core content [57]. Therefore, to understand the progress of research in CERPPS, this study makes use of the visualization network and burst keyword functionalities of keyword co-occurrence in CiteSpace to analyze research hotspots and frontiers in the CERPPS sector. The visualization network obtained through keyword co-occurrence analysis on CiteSpace is depicted in Figure 9. Nodes symbolize keywords, with lines connecting nodes that co-occur in the same document. Each node’s magnitude is directly related to how often the corresponding keyword is used. The dynamic timeline in Figure 9, with its color progression from gray to red, represents the years from 2006 to June 2024, indicating when the keywords appeared. The more colors on a node, the more frequently the keyword has been observed over these years. Table 7 lists the 30 most frequently co-occurring keywords in CERPPS-related studies. Table 8 presents the 16 keywords with the highest burst strength from 2006 to June 2024, based on the results of the burst keyword analysis.

4.1. Analysis of Research Hotspots

Keyword co-occurrence analysis uncovers the strong connections between key terms within a research topic, as shown by how often these terms appear together in literature [58]. The more often a keyword co-occurs, the more often it is mentioned in relevant research papers, indicating its significance and the focus of research within that research topic [59]. In this study, the prominence of keywords in Table 7 corresponds to the magnitude of nodes in Figure 9, which further confirms the direct link between co-occurrence frequency and the significance of research. Based on this, the current main research focuses of the CERPPS are summarized as follows:
(1)
Type of research: CERPPS research focuses on system types, including centralized [60], distributed [61], hybrid [62,63], and internal components like photovoltaic modules [64], batteries [65], and energy storage systems [66].
(2)
Research methods: The primary research approaches in CERPPS encompass life cycle assessment, modeling, prototyping, and design optimization. These are the most common approaches employed by researchers to solve issues with carbon emissions in the solar industry. Among these, the full LCA is primarily employed to assess the carbon footprint, energy payback period, economic benefits, and so on. Modeling encompasses theoretical and mathematical approaches; theoretical modeling provides the primary technical direction or framework for subsequent research, while mathematical modeling constructs a mathematical representation of the actual issue, solves the model, and then applies the solutions to the real-world problem. Prototyping is one of the key methods to test the overall performance, longevity, feasibility, and uncertainty of a photovoltaic power system, usually in the laboratory or on a specific occasion. Design optimization is mostly accomplished by modifying variables and selecting a suitable model based on the outcomes of tests and evaluations.
(3)
Evaluation analysis: LCA is the main assessment methodology. LCA has been connected to issues such as payback time [67], cost [61], electricity production efficiency [68], and greenhouse gas emissions [52]. Assessment and analysis are conducted to gather pertinent data from every stage of photovoltaic power systems’ life cycles, serving as a foundation for enhancing carbon emission reductions. These assessment methods have become the main source of research priorities and improvement measures in CERPPS.
(4)
Optimization analysis: Optimization analysis enhances objectives, designs, and models by leveraging existing solutions to yield options that are both energy-efficient and environmentally friendly. This research primarily focuses on the optimization of photovoltaic module production, module end-of-life recycling, energy storage, and low-carbon hybrid system design in CERPPS.
(5)
Environmental impact: The existing literature assesses the impact on the global environment by tracking the carbon footprint of the photovoltaic power systems.
(6)
Economic impact: In current studies, the economic impact of CERPPS is mainly reflected in circular sustainability. Recycling end-of-life photovoltaic modules allows for the effective reduction of human, material, and financial resources spent in the production stage. Carbon emissions from raw material extraction and component manufacturing are also reduced.
By collecting and summarizing data, this study discovered that, since 2006, the keywords “energy”, “greenhouse gas emissions”, “energy payback” and “renewable energy” have attracted the attention of scholars. Research hotspots in CERPPS include simulation modeling of CERPPS, design, optimization, and improvement of CERPPS, as well as assessment of carbon emissions throughout the entire life cycle of a photovoltaic project.

4.2. Analysis of Research Frontiers

Using burst detection analysis in CiteSpace leads to better understanding the changes in keywords over time [61]. The stronger the burst intensity of a burst keyword, the more concentrated the corresponding keyword is, and the more frequently it is cited over a period of time. Table 8 lists the top 16 burst keywords for ”intensity”, which represent a rapidly growing theme in CERPPS-related research. In Table 8, the first occurrence of the keyword is indicated by the third column, Date. The final column displays two different bars: dark blue and red. The dark blue bar signifies the initial emergence of the keyword, and the red bar corresponds to the time period shown in Table 8’s columns 5 and 6, which shows the period when the keyword peaked and attracted the most attention.
“Power generation” is the keyword with the highest burst strength in Table 8 and is also one of the most advanced research frontiers. It began to be studied by scholars in 2006, with a burst period from 2016 to 2018. As the world wants more renewable energy, especially solar power, researchers are looking closely at how well the solar industry makes energy and what it does to the environment [69]. A study says that the energy used and greenhouse gases made when making solar panels have reached a balance with what the panels do while working [70]. This means solar power is now making a net positive energy output and has stopped a good amount of greenhouse gases from being let out. Another study gives an LCA of silicon solar modules used in China’s solar power grid, illustrating the environmental effects of the solar sector and its significance in energy generation [71]. Plus, another investigation underscores solar technology’s role as a sustainable energy source and anticipates its life cycle evaluation, which might spark more interest in the study of “power generation” [72].
Between 2011 and 2016, the keyword “CdTe” showed a strong surge, with an intensity of 4.79 over six years. This was mainly because CdTe’s use in the solar power industry grew quickly. As the world wanted more renewable energy, CdTe became a focus of study due to its high efficiency in turning light into electricity and its low cost [53]. During this time, the LCA method was widely used to study CdTe solar technology, proving that it uses less energy and has a smaller impact on the environment throughout its life, especially in its potential to reduce carbon emissions [38,73]. Moreover, technological innovations and improvements have further increased the efficiency and performance of CdTe solar technology, making it more competitive in the solar market [41]. The research indicates that incorporating CdTe in photovoltaic power systems not only enhances energy yield but also decreases dependence on non-renewable energy sources, furthering the transition of photovoltaic power systems towards sustainable, low-carbon growth.
The keyword “payback time” had a burst strength of 2.99 and was prominent for 8 years. This is mainly because people around the world have come to understand more and more about the potential and environmental benefits of photovoltaic technology as a clean energy source, and photovoltaic power systems have developed rapidly during this period. Peng and colleagues’ analysis shows that photovoltaic power systems provide clear benefits by saving energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions throughout their use, compared to the energy consumed and emissions produced during their manufacturing and operation [36]. This means they have a short energy payback period and play a significant role in reducing carbon emissions. Vasilis et al. also highlight the environmental advantages of photovoltaic technology, especially its ability to markedly lower greenhouse gas emissions in the later stages of system use, which is crucial for the industry’s move towards low-carbon development [38]. Additionally, Raugei et al. emphasize the differences in energy payback times and carbon footprints among various photovoltaic technologies, offering a scientific basis for choosing more environmentally friendly and efficient solar options [41]. These studies are closely tied to carbon emission reduction in the solar industry, providing scientific evidence for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by solar systems. By assessing the full life cycle environmental impact of solar systems, from production to disposal, researchers can better understand the contribution of solar technology to reducing the carbon footprint.
The keywords “end of life”, “panels”, “renewable energy”, and “recovery” have consistently gained attention from the time they emerged up to June 2024. Current literature on “end of life” looks at the environmental and economic aspects of recycling used solar panels, seeking out technical hurdles, innovative solutions, and the sustainable potential of the solar industry within a circular economy [74]. Research on “panels” is geared towards the conversion efficiency of photovoltaic cells [75] and their environmental impact during manufacturing, also considering the cells in terms of cost, efficiency, stability, and environmental friendliness [76]. Studies on “renewable energy” concentrate on evaluating the life cycle of photovoltaic power generation, showing how it affects greenhouse gas emissions at different stages and suggesting carbon footprint reduction through improvements in key areas, thus supporting the power sector in addressing climate change [77]. “Recovery” research focuses on different recycling technologies for solar panels, assessing the environmental impact of the recycling phase to identify which methods should be given priority for the best economic and environmental outcomes [78,79].
In CiteSpace, keyword burst detection is a method for spotting emerging or active topics within a field of study [80]. Thus, keywords that have burst onto the scene in recent years signify new trends in research. Their sudden rise in academic discussions likely stems from new research findings, technological advancements, or shifts in societal focus. After sorting out and summarizing the data, this study finds that the research frontier in CERPPS focuses on keywords such as “end of life”, “panels”, “renewable energy”, and “recovery”. These studies facilitate the growth of sustainability within the photovoltaic industry, boost the effectiveness of solar panels, scrutinize the environmental consequences throughout the lifespan of photovoltaic energy production, and perfect the recycling processes for solar panels to lessen their carbon footprint.

4.3. Future Prospects and Challenges

The outcomes of this research will enable scholars to quickly locate influential institutions or journals and understand recent hotspots and frontiers in the solar industry. It also supports the industry’s growth on a low-carbon, sustainable path and accelerates the achievement of dual carbon objectives. However, while research in CERPPS is evolving, technological, environmental, economic, and policy factors will drive or hinder CERPPS, all of which are uncertain, as follows:
(1)
The main economic challenges faced by CERPPS include the limitation of raw material supply, low conversion efficiency, accumulation of waste photovoltaics, and high recycling costs. The scarcity of raw materials is primarily due to finite resource reserves, increasing extraction difficulties, and the substantial energy required for processing. Low efficiency in solar panels implies that they generate less electricity than the amount of sunlight they capture, leading to an ineffective use of solar energy. Furthermore, the disposal of end-of-life solar panels can have detrimental environmental impacts. Artaş, S.B. et al. carried out a case analysis of the Karapinar solar power plant in Turkey [81]. They assessed the projected waste from solar power globally and in Turkey through 2050 and detailed the mathematical model underlying these projections. Their findings indicate that the non-recycling of solar panels could lead to environmental and health hazards, such as heavy metal contamination, toxic gas emissions, resource wastage, and increased carbon emissions. They also highlighted the importance of recycling solar panels by comparing the economic benefits and carbon footprint associated with recycling. However, the requirements for energy, innovation, and funding in the recycling process present significant challenges. Therefore, research should focus on large-scale solar panel manufacturing and innovative carbon capture technologies. This entails developing cost-effective materials that enhance the longevity and performance of solar panels, as well as exploring advanced recycling techniques for the sustainable reuse of solar materials.
(2)
Another factor is the environmental impact of photovoltaic power systems. The extraction of raw materials for photovoltaic components is energy-intensive and emits greenhouse gases, contradicting low-carbon objectives. During the production process, particularly during high-temperature steps, significant amounts of carbon dioxide are emitted, contributing to the environmental burden. Additionally, carbon emissions generated during transportation and installation impact the environmental assessment of CERPPS. Future research must assess and mitigate the environmental impacts of photovoltaic manufacturing and deployment, utilizing tools such as LCA and implementing measures to reduce emissions.
(3)
In terms of the economy, cost-effective photovoltaic power is a challenge, with high power generation costs compared to traditional systems. Therefore, cost reduction becomes critical for the widespread adoption of low-carbon innovations. Looking ahead, cost-cutting efforts should focus on module manufacture, cell efficiency, and system balancing.
(4)
Political measures influence the development of carbon emission reduction in photovoltaic power systems. Policies like the EU’s Climate Law boost photovoltaic research and deployment by setting ambitious emission reduction targets and increasing renewable energy goals. However, some countries’ policies, such as India’s ALMM, limit market diversity and innovation. Additionally, evolving photovoltaic technology outpaces policy updates, creating a demand–supply gap. Grid integration of photovoltaic power also demands policy support for infrastructure upgrades. Effective policy is key to reducing carbon emissions from photovoltaic power systems, and future research should focus on localized policy adjustments to address operational challenges and achieve emission reduction goals.

5. Conclusions

To comprehensively understand and effectively implement the measures of CERPPS, attain clean energy goals, and foster the comprehensive carbon-neutral and sustainable development of photovoltaic power technology, this study employs the systematic data mining, trend analysis, and visualization capabilities of the bibliometric analysis tool. An exhaustive analysis of CERPPS publications within the WOS database spanning from 2006 to June 2024 was performed utilizing VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Upon thorough analysis of the current landscape of CERPPS research, this study identifies the following three key findings:
(1)
CERPPS research hotspots. The research hotspots in CERPPS include the classification of photovoltaic power systems, their structural elements, research technologies, performance evaluation, optimization strategies, and the assessment of environmental impact and economic sustainability. Through the application of advanced techniques, including life cycle assessment, model building, prototype development, and design improvement, researchers seek to investigate a variety of photovoltaic power systems with the objective of improving their energy conversion efficiency and minimizing environmental impact. Furthermore, the aim is to explore innovative approaches to the economic and environmental sustainability of photovoltaic power systems through comprehensive assessments, strategic optimization, and the evaluation of environmental impacts.
(2)
Current Research Frontiers of CERPPS. CERPPS exhibits a diverse range of characteristics. Currently, the field’s hot topics mainly revolve around keywords like “power generation” and “CdTe.” Research into these keywords seeks to effectively decrease the carbon footprint of photovoltaic power systems through enhancements in battery efficiency, comprehensive assessments of environmental impacts, and the optimization of recycling technologies. These endeavors not only highlight breakthroughs in new technologies but also reflect the increasing awareness of environmental protection in society, which is spurred by both policy support and market demand.
(3)
Opportunities and Challenges in CERPPS. Photovoltaic power systems are embracing opportunities such as technological innovation, growing environmental awareness, policy support, and market demand. However, they also encounter challenges, including the need to optimize technology and costs. To achieve low-carbon and sustainable development in photovoltaic power systems, a comprehensive approach is required to address these challenges.
The comprehensive analysis indicates that CERPPS research is centered on enhancing the performance of photovoltaic power systems and fostering low-carbon sustainable development. Amid technological advances, heightened environmental awareness, expanding market demand, and ongoing government support, future studies ought to focus on the advancement of efficient, economical, and environmentally sustainable photovoltaic materials, such as perovskite solar cells, CIGS thin-film cells, and silicon tandem cells. Concurrently, in-depth research on the recycling and reuse of photovoltaic modules, along with comprehensive life cycle environmental assessments, is crucial for establishing a circular economy within the photovoltaic power sector. Concurrent with the development of the Internet of Things and AI technologies, the exploration and innovation of smart photovoltaic systems should become a key research focus. This will positively impact efficient energy management, system self-optimization, improving energy conversion efficiency, reducing operation and maintenance costs, and real-time monitoring of carbon emissions throughout the life cycle. Additionally, the results of this study not only offer a multi-dimensional pathway for reducing carbon emissions in photovoltaic power systems but also serve as a valuable reference for policymakers, corporate decision-makers, academic researchers, and industry professionals. Governments can develop policies informed by research hotspots and cutting-edge technologies, companies can guide research and development and marketing strategies accordingly, and industry professionals can strengthen life cycle assessment and material recycling to jointly promote the development of photovoltaic power technology towards a low-carbon and sustainable future.
Certainly, despite the significant findings from this study within CERPPS, challenges persist due to limited data sources and insufficient bibliometric analysis techniques. Future research endeavors will adopt broader data collection methods, integrate cutting-edge technologies, and delve deeper into the discrepancies between academic research and industry practices, with the goal of contributing to the field’s understanding of carbon emission reduction in photovoltaic power systems.

Author Contributions

A.W.: Funding acquisition, Project administration, Methodology, Supervision, Supervision. Q.L.: Data curation, Investigation, Visualization, Writing original draft. C.L.: Supervision, Writing review & editing. L.Y.: Data curation, Investigation. S.S.: Supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China Funded Project (No. 72101237).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available on request from the authors.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Qin, Y.; Niu, G.; Wang, X.; Luo, D.; Duan, Y. Status of CO2 conversion using microwave plasma. J. CO2 Util. 2018, 28, 283–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Striugas, N.; Tamosiunas, A.; Marcinauskas, L.; Paulauskas, R.; Zakarauskas, K.; Skvorcinskiene, R. A sustainable approach for plasma reforming of tail biogas for onsite syngas production during lean combustion operation. Energy Conv. Manag. 2020, 209, 112617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. CO2 Emissions in 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2022 (accessed on 18 November 2024).
  4. Law, A.M.; Jones, L.O.; Walls, J.M. The performance and durability of Anti-reflection coatings for solar module cover glass-a review. Sol. Energy 2023, 261, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Liu, D.; Liu, J.; Wang, S.; Xu, M.; Akbar, S.J. Contribution of international photovoltaic trade to global greenhouse gas emission reduction: The example of China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 143, 114–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, S.; Wang, Y.; Du, H.; Cui, Z. The current situation, development aims and policy recommendation of China’s electric power industry. Int. J. Clim. Chang. Strateg. Manag. 2023, 15, 282–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Meng, X.; Yu, Y. Can renewable energy portfolio standards and carbon tax policies promote carbon emission reduction in China’s power industry? Energy Policy 2023, 174, 113461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hu, S.; Li, D.; Wang, X. Study on the influence of carbon trading pilot policy on energy efficiency in power industry. Int. J. Clim. Chang. Strateg. Manag. 2023, 15, 159–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Al-Shetwi, A.Q.; Hannan, M.A.; Jern, K.P.; Mansur, M.; Mahlia, T.M.I. Grid-connected renewable energy sources: Review of the recent integration requirements and control methods. J. Clean Prod. 2020, 253, 119831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kouro, S.; Leon, J.I.; Vinnikov, D.; Franquelo, L.G. Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Systems: An Overview of Recent Research and Emerging PV Converter Technology. IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag. 2015, 9, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mandelli, S.; Barbieri, J.; Mereu, R.; Colombo, E. Off-grid systems for rural electrification in developing countries: Definitions, classification and a comprehensive literature review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2016, 58, 1621–1646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ahmad, J.; Imran, M.; Khalid, A.; Iqbal, W.; Ashraf, S.R.; Adnan, M.; Ali, S.F.; Khokhar, K.S. Techno economic analysis of a wind-photovoltaic-biomass hybrid renewable energy system for rural electrification: A case study of Kallar Kahar. Energy 2018, 148, 208–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Li, G.; Shittu, S.; Diallo, T.M.O.; Yu, M.; Zhao, X.; Ji, J. A review of solar photovoltaic-thermoelectric hybrid system for electricity generation. Energy 2018, 158, 41–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sinha, S.; Chandel, S.S. Review of recent trends in optimization techniques for solar photovoltaic-wind based hybrid energy systems. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2015, 50, 755–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ballif, C.; Haug, F.-J.; Boccard, M.; Verlinden, P.J.; Hahn, G. Status and perspectives of crystalline silicon photovoltaics in research and industry. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2022, 7, 597–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Imenes, A.G.; Mills, D.R. Spectral beam splitting technology for increased conversion efficiency in solar concentrating systems: A review. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2004, 84, 19–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ahmadi, M.H.; Ghazvini, M.; Sadeghzadeh, M.; Nazari, M.A.; Kumar, R.; Naeimi, A.; Ming, T. Solar power technology for electricity generation: A critical review. Energy Sci. Eng. 2018, 6, 340–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aksoy, M.H.; Ispir, M. Techno-economic feasibility of different photovoltaic technologies. Appl. Eng. Lett. 2023, 8, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mayr, P.; Scharnhorst, A. Scientometrics and information retrieval: Weak-links revitalized. Scientometrics 2015, 102, 2193–2199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Luo, X.; Wu, Y.; Niu, L.; Huang, L. Bibliometric Analysis of Health Technology Research: 1990∼2020. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, Y.; Lin, M.; Zhuang, D. Wastewater treatment and emerging contaminants: Bibliometric analysis. Chemosphere 2022, 297, 133932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chang, L.; Watanabe, T.; Xu, H.; Han, J. Knowledge Mapping on Nepal’s Protected Areas Using CiteSpace and VOSviewer. Land 2022, 11, 1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Pan, X.; Yan, E.; Cui, M.; Hua, W. Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools. J. Informetr. 2018, 12, 481–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ding, X.; Yang, Z. Knowledge mapping of platform research: A visual analysis using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022, 22, 787–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hu, H.; Xue, W.; Jiang, P.; Li, Y. Bibliometric analysis for ocean renewable energy: An comprehensive review for hotspots, frontiers, and emerging trends. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2022, 167, 112739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2016, 106, 213–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Merigo, J.M.; Yang, J.-B. A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science. Omega 2017, 73, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hicks, D.; Wang, J. Coverage and overlap of the new social sciences and humanities journal lists. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011, 62, 284–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Singh, V.K.; Singh, P.; Karmakar, M.; Leta, J.; Mayr, P. The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2021, 126, 5113–5142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wang, Q.; Waltman, L. Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus. J. Informetr. 2016, 10, 347–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Andresen, S.; Skjaerseth, J.B.; Jevnaker, T.; Wettestad, J. The Paris Agreement: Consequences for the EU and Carbon Markets? Politics Gov. 2016, 4, 188–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bechtold, U.; Ornetzeder, M.; Sotoudeh, M. The Global Citizens’ Climate Summit—A Project Related to the UN Climate Change Conference 2009. GAIA 2009, 18, 343–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Calliari, E.; Mysiak, J.; Vanhala, L. A digital climate summit to maintain Paris Agreement ambition. Nat. Clim. Change 2020, 10, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Small, H. Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1973, 24, 265–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Trujillo, C.M.; Long, T.M. Document co-citation analysis to enhance transdisciplinary research. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4, e1701130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Peng, J.; Lu, L.; Yang, H. Review on life cycle assessment of energy payback and greenhouse gas emission of solar photovoltaic systems. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2013, 19, 255–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fthenakis, V.M.; Kim, H.C.; Alsema, E. Emissions from photovoltaic life cycles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 2168–2174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Fthenakis, V.M.; Kim, H.C. Photovoltaics: Life-cycle analyses. Sol. Energy 2011, 85, 1609–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Latunussa, C.E.L.; Ardente, F.; Blengini, G.A.; Mancini, L. Life Cycle Assessment of an innovative recycling process for crystalline silicon photovoltaic panels. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2016, 156, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Fthenakis, V.; Alsema, E. Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status. Prog. Photovolt. 2006, 14, 275–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Raugei, M.; Bargigli, S.; Ulgiati, S. Life cycle assessment and energy pay-back time of advanced photovoltaic modules: CdTe and CIS compared to poly-Si. Energy 2007, 32, 1310–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Alsema, E.A. Energy pay-back time and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of PV systems. Prog. Photovolt. 2000, 8, 17–25. [Google Scholar]
  43. Jungbluth, N. Life cycle assessment of crystalline photovoltaics in the swiss ecoinvent database. Prog. Photovolt. 2005, 13, 429–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Stoppato, A. Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation. Energy 2008, 33, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Fu, Y.; Liu, X.; Yuan, Z. Life-cycle assessment of multi-crystalline photovoltaic (PV) systems in China. J. Clean Prod. 2015, 86, 180–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pacca, S.; Sivaraman, D.; Keoleian, G.A. Parameters affecting the life cycle performance of PV technologies and systems. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 3316–3326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sherwani, A.F.; Usmani, J.A. Varun Life cycle assessment of solar PV based electricity generation systems: A review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2010, 14, 540–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. de Wild-Scholten, M.J. Energy payback time and carbon footprint of commercial photovoltaic systems. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2013, 119, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hsu, D.D.; O’Donoughue, P.; Fthenakis, V.; Heath, G.A.; Kim, H.C.; Sawyer, P.; Choi, J.-K.; Turney, D.E. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Electricity Generation. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16, S122–S135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Berger, W.; Simon, F.-G.; Weimann, K.; Alsema, E.A. A novel approach for the recycling of thin film photovoltaic modules. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 711–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Fthenakis, V.M. End-of-life management and recycling of PV modules. Energy Policy 2000, 28, 1051–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mason, J.E.; Fthenakis, V.M.; Hansen, T.; Kim, H.C. Energy payback and life-cycle CO2 emissions of the BOS in an optimized 3.5 MW PV installation. Prog. Photovolt. 2006, 14, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gong, J.; Darling, S.B.; You, F. Perovskite photovoltaics: Life-cycle assessment of energy and environmental impacts. Energy Environ. Sci. 2015, 8, 1953–1968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bhandari, K.P.; Collier, J.M.; Ellingson, R.J.; Apul, D.S. Energy payback time (EPBT) and energy return on energy invested (EROI) of solar photovoltaic systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2015, 47, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Deng, R.; Chang, N.L.; Ouyang, Z.; Chong, C.M. A techno-economic review of silicon photovoltaic module recycling. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2019, 109, 532–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Li, C.Z.; Lai, X.; Xiao, B.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Guo, S.; Zhao, Y. A holistic review on life cycle energy of buildings: An analysis from 2009 to 2019. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2020, 134, 110372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhang, L.; Ling, J.; Lin, M. Carbon neutrality: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 45498–45514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Benita, F. Human mobility behavior in COVID-19: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Sust. Cities Soc. 2021, 70, 102916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ding, Y.; Chowdhury, G.G.; Foo, S. Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis. Inf. Process. Manag. 2001, 37, 817–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Loughlin, D.H.; Yelverton, W.H.; Dodder, R.L.; Miller, C.A. Methodology for examining potential technology breakthroughs for mitigating CO2 and application to centralized solar photovoltaics. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2013, 15, 9–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Novacheck, J.; Johnson, J.X. The environmental and cost implications of solar energy preferences in Renewable Portfolio Standards. Energy Policy 2015, 86, 250–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cucchiella, F.; D’Adamo, I. Estimation of the energetic and environmental impacts of a roof-mounted building-integrated photovoltaic systems. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2012, 16, 5245–5259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Xue, J. Photovoltaic agriculture—New opportunity for photovoltaic applications in China. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2017, 73, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hengevoss, D.; Baumgartner, C.; Nisato, G.; Hugi, C. Life Cycle Assessment and eco-efficiency of prospective, flexible, tandem organic photovoltaic module. Sol. Energy 2016, 137, 317–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Suryoatmojo, H.; Elbaset, A.A.; Syafaruddin; Hiyama, T. Genetic algorithm based optimal sizing of PV-diesel-battery system considering CO2 emission and reliability. Int. J. Innov. Comp. Inf. Control. 2010, 6, 4631–4649. [Google Scholar]
  66. Hou, Y.; Vidu, R.; Stroeve, P. Solar Energy Storage Methods. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 8954–8964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hu, A.H.; Huang, L.H.; Lou, S.; Kuo, C.-H.; Huang, C.-Y.; Chian, K.-J.; Chien, H.-T.; Hong, H.-F. Assessment of the Carbon Footprint, Social Benefit of Carbon Reduction, and Energy Payback Time of a High-Concentration Photovoltaic System. Sustainability 2017, 9, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Koroneos, C.; Stylos, N.; Moussiopoulos, N. LCA of multicrystalline silicon photovoltaic systems—Part 1: Present situation and future perspectives. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2006, 11, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Wang, Y.; Wang, R.; Tanaka, K.; Ciais, P.; Penuelas, J.; Balkanski, Y.; Sardans, J.; Hauglustaine, D.; Liu, W.; Xing, X.; et al. Accelerating the energy transition towards photovoltaic and wind in China. Nature 2023, 619, 761–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Louwen, A.; van Sark, W.G.J.H.M.; Faaij, A.P.C.; Schropp, R.E.I. Re-assessment of net energy production and greenhouse gas emissions avoidance after 40 years of photovoltaics development. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 13728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hou, G.; Sun, H.; Jiang, Z.; Pan, Z.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, Y.; Yao, Q. Life cycle assessment of grid-connected photovoltaic power generation from crystalline silicon solar modules in China. Appl. Energy 2016, 164, 882–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ludin, N.A.; Mustafa, N.I.; Hanafiah, M.M.; Ibrahim, M.A.; Teridi, M.A.M.; Sepeai, S.; Zaharim, A.; Sopian, K. Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: A review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2018, 96, 11–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Başol, B.M.; McCandless, B. Brief review of cadmium telluride-based photovoltaic technologies. J. Photonics Energy 2014, 4, 040996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Farrell, C.C.; Osman, A.I.; Doherty, R.; Saad, M.; Zhang, X.; Murphy, A.; Harrison, J.; Vennard, A.S.M.; Kumaravel, V.; Al-Muhtaseb, A.H.; et al. Technical challenges and opportunities in realising a circular economy for waste photovoltaic modules. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2020, 128, 109911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Tyagi, V.V.; Rahim, N.A.A.; Rahim, N.A.; Selvaraj, J.A.L. Progress in solar PV technology: Research and achievement. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2013, 20, 443–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Graetzel, M. The advent of mesoscopic injection solar cells. Prog. Photovolt. 2006, 14, 429–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Nugent, D.; Sovacool, B.K. Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar PV and wind energy: A critical meta-survey. Energy Policy 2014, 65, 229–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Contreras Lisperguer, R.; Munoz Ceron, E.; de la Casa Higueras, J.; Diaz Martin, R. Environmental Impact Assessment of crystalline solar photovoltaic panels’ End-of-Life phase: Open and Closed-Loop Material Flow scenarios. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 2020, 23, 157–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Maani, T.; Celik, I.; Heben, M.J.; Ellingson, R.J.; Apul, D. Environmental impacts of recycling crystalline silicon (c-SI) and cadmium telluride (CDTE) solar panels. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 735, 138827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kleinberg, J. Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 2003, 7, 373–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Artas, S.B.; Kocaman, E.; Bilgic, H.H.; Tutumlu, H.; Yagli, H.; Yumrutas, R. Why PV panels must be recycled at the end of their economic life span? A case study on recycling together with the global situation. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023, 174, 63–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 10428 g001
Figure 1. Research Method and Data Overview.
Figure 1. Research Method and Data Overview.
Sustainability 16 10428 g001
Sustainability 16 10428 g002
Figure 2. The data collection process.
Figure 2. The data collection process.
Sustainability 16 10428 g002
Sustainability 16 10428 g003
Figure 3. Number of annual related publications.
Figure 3. Number of annual related publications.
Sustainability 16 10428 g003
Sustainability 16 10428 g004
Figure 4. Collaboration network map of the authors analysis. Three parts of the diagram are included, respectively: (a) the network with 142 authors; (b) the strongest total connection strength network, with 10 authors; and (c) the most extensive network of cooperation, with 28 authors.
Figure 4. Collaboration network map of the authors analysis. Three parts of the diagram are included, respectively: (a) the network with 142 authors; (b) the strongest total connection strength network, with 10 authors; and (c) the most extensive network of cooperation, with 28 authors.
Sustainability 16 10428 g004
Sustainability 16 10428 g005
Figure 5. Collaboration network map of the institution analysis.
Figure 5. Collaboration network map of the institution analysis.
Sustainability 16 10428 g005
Sustainability 16 10428 g006
Figure 6. Collaboration network map of the countries/regions analysis.
Figure 6. Collaboration network map of the countries/regions analysis.
Sustainability 16 10428 g006
Sustainability 16 10428 g007
Figure 7. Visualization network map of the journal co-citation analysis.
Figure 7. Visualization network map of the journal co-citation analysis.
Sustainability 16 10428 g007
Sustainability 16 10428 g008
Figure 8. Visualization network map of the document co-citation analysis.
Figure 8. Visualization network map of the document co-citation analysis.
Sustainability 16 10428 g008
Sustainability 16 10428 g009
Figure 9. Visualization network map of the keyword co-occurrence analysis.
Figure 9. Visualization network map of the keyword co-occurrence analysis.
Sustainability 16 10428 g009
Table 1. Top 10 active authors in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 1. Top 10 active authors in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankAuthorDocumentsTotal CitationsAverage CitationsTotal Link Strength
1Ilke Celik739055.7133
2Nieves Espinosa629048.3318
3Defne Apul536673.2023
4Daniel Chemisana532364.608
5Vasilis Fthenakis540781.4019
6Vasilis M. Fthenakis537775.4012
7Michael J. Heben536673.2026
8Joshua M. Pearce530661.207
9Enrica Leccisi519739.4017
10Wenhui Ma510621.2028
Table 2. Top 10 active institutions in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 2. Top 10 active institutions in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankInstitutionCountries/RegionsPublicationsTotal Link StrengthTotal
Citations		Average Citations
1Chinese Academy of SciencesChina143068749.07
2Columbia UniversityUSA1114102593.18
3Brookhaven National
Laboratory		USA10161249124.90
4Utrecht UniversityNetherlands93468876.44
5North China Electric Power UniversityChina81716120.13
6The University of New South WalesAustralia81131439.25
7University of LleidaSpain7544864.00
8University of ToledoUSA7563791.00
9Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISEGermany61327746.17
10Arizona State UniversityCanada5431062.00
Table 3. Top 10 dominant countries/regions in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 3. Top 10 dominant countries/regions in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankCountries/RegionsDocumentsTotal CitationsAverage CitationsTotal Link Strength
1USA89571364.1959
2China78396450.8252
3Italy28172261.5010
4Australia2673328.1936
5England25145058.0030
6Germany24158065.8324
7Spain23105846.0019
8India172221130.6517
9Netherlands17106062.3519
10France1235929.927
Table 4. Top 10 countries/regions for cumulative capacity in 2022.
Table 4. Top 10 countries/regions for cumulative capacity in 2022.
RankCountries/RegionsCumulative Capacity (GW)
1China414.5
(2)European Union209.3
2USA141.6
3Japan84.9
4India79.1
5Germany67.2
6Australia30.0
7Spain26.6
8Italy25.0
9Korea24.8
10Brazil23.6
Table 5. Top 20 active core journals in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 5. Top 20 active core journals in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankSourceTotal CitationsTotal Link Strength
1Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews110096,839
2Progress in Photovoltaics82570,650
3Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells79888,768
4Solar Energy73467,149
5Journal of Cleaner Production60656,047
6Applied Energy57847,194
7Renewable Energy57152,484
8Energy54041,141
9Energy Policy50136,338
10Environmental Science & Technology28921,179
11Energy & Environmental Science27433,012
12The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment26820,747
13Energies22419,533
14Resources, Conservation and Recycling21528,067
15Energy Conversion and Management21219,573
16Waste Management20721,918
17Energy and Buildings16217,296
18Journal of Industrial Ecology15714,188
19Science14521,602
20Nature Energy12720,222
Table 6. Top 20 references in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 6. Top 20 references in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankReferenceTotal CitationsYearSourceKeywords
1[36]552013Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsPhotovoltaic system; Life cycle assessment; Energy payback time; GHG emission rate; Energy requirement
2[37]542008Environmental Science & TechnologyENERGY PAYBACK; CO2 EMISSIONS; PV; CADMIUM; MODULES
3[38]542011Solar EnergyPhotovoltaics; Life-cycle analysis; Life-cycle assessment; Environmental and health effects; Energy payback times
4[39]462016Solar Energy Materials and Solar CellsLife Cycle Assessment (LCA); Photovoltaic (PV); Silicon; Waste of electric and electronic equipment (WEEE); Recycling; Renewable energy
5[40]452006Progress in PhotovoltaicsPhotovoltaics; Energy payback; External costs; Greenhouse emissions; Life cycle
6[41]452007EnergyLCA; Photovoltaics; CdTe; CIS; Thin film
7[42]402000Progress in PhotovoltaicsModule
8[43]392005Progress in PhotovoltaicsAllocation; Ecoinvent; Electricity mixes; Life cycle assessment; LCA; Multi-output process; Photovoltaic; Switzerland
9[44]392008EnergyLife cycle assessment; Photovoltaic panels; Energy payback time
10[45]382015Journal of Cleaner ProductionLife-cycle assessment; Multi-Si PV system; Energy payback time; Environmental impacts; Environmental management
11[46]382007Energy PolicyLife cycle assessment; PV system; Net energy ratio
12[47]382010Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsSustainable development; Life cycle assessment; Energy flow; Solar PV; Electricity
13[48]362013Solar Energy Materials and Solar CellsLife cycle assessment; Energy payback time; Carbon footprint; Crystalline silicon; Thin-film; Photovoltaic systems
14[49]332012Journal of Industrial EcologyGlobal warming; Industrial ecology; Renewable energy; Life cycle assessment (LCA); Meta-analysis; Solar
15[50]302010Resources, Conservation and RecyclingRecycling; Photovoltaic; Thin film modules; CdTe; CIS; Mechanical processing; Life cycle analysis
16[51]302000Energy PolicyPhotovoltaics; Recycling; Decommissioning; Environment; Waste
17[52]302006Progress in PhotovoltaicsPV plant; Balance of system; Life-cycle assessment; Energy payback; Greenhouse gas emissions
18[53]292015Energy & Environmental ScienceSolar-cells; Deposition; Payback; Performance; Cadmium; Time; CdTe
19[54]282015Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsEnergy payback time; PV; Energy return on energy invested; Embedded energy
20[55]282019Renewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsSolar photovoltaic module recycling; End-of-life management; Recycling economics; Techno-economic analysis; Toxicity; Sustainable development
Table 7. Top 30 keywords sorted by number of counts in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
Table 7. Top 30 keywords sorted by number of counts in photovoltaic power systems carbon emission reduction.
RankCountCentralityYearKeywords
11850.032006Life cycle assessment
21380.202007PV system
31130.362006Greenhouse gas emission
4640.192006Energy payback
5600.232006Energy
6500.062007System
7490.332011Performance
8440.472011Module
9370.092009Renewable energy
10370.012009Environmental impact
11320.312012Technology
12280.072010Generation
13260.002013Solar energy
14260.122013Impact
15230.182010Cost
16190.082016Cell
17180.022016Silicon
18170.072016Power generation
19170.182007CdTe
20170.122018Management
21160.082011Solar cell
22150.072017Design
23150.012020End of life
24140.002011Payback time
25140.042020Panel
26130.032010Recycling
27110.072015Electricity
28110.032007Cadmium
29110.232014Optimization
30100.152017Carbon footprint
Table 8. Top 16 keywords with the highest citation burst from 2006 to June 2024.
Table 8. Top 16 keywords with the highest citation burst from 2006 to June 2024.
RankKeywordsYearStrengthBeginEnd2006 to June 2024
1Power generation20065.420162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂
2End of life20064.9320232024▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃
3CdTe 20064.7920112016▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
4Solar energy20064.3420212022▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂
5Panel20064.2520202024▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▃
6Electricity20064.0120152017▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
7Renewable energy20063.9320192024▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▃▃
8Cost20063.9320142017▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
9Technology20063.8120122014▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
10Environmental Impact20063.7720182021▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▂▂▂
11Power20063.5820122015▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
12Design20063.2320212022▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂
13Solar cell20063.0720112012▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
14Payback time20062.9920112018▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂
15Recovery20062.9420232024▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃
16Model20062.9220212022▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂
Note: Column 7 displays two different bars: dark blue and red. The dark blue bar signifies the initial emergence of the keyword, and the red bar corresponds to the time period shown in Table 8’s columns 5 and 6, which indicates the period when the keyword attracted the most attention.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, A.; Lin, Q.; Liu, C.; Yang, L.; Sun, S. Sustainable Energy Development: Reviewing Carbon Emission Reduction in Photovoltaic Power Systems. Sustainability 2024, 16, 10428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310428

AMA Style

Wang A, Lin Q, Liu C, Yang L, Sun S. Sustainable Energy Development: Reviewing Carbon Emission Reduction in Photovoltaic Power Systems. Sustainability. 2024; 16(23):10428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310428

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Ailing, Qiongfang Lin, Chunlu Liu, Liu Yang, and Shaonan Sun. 2024. "Sustainable Energy Development: Reviewing Carbon Emission Reduction in Photovoltaic Power Systems" Sustainability 16, no. 23: 10428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310428

APA Style

Wang, A., Lin, Q., Liu, C., Yang, L., & Sun, S. (2024). Sustainable Energy Development: Reviewing Carbon Emission Reduction in Photovoltaic Power Systems. Sustainability, 16(23), 10428. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162310428

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop