Optimizing Battery Ownership Strategies for B3 Waste Management in Off-Grid Solar PV Systems Using Fuzzy-AHP

Authors

  • Erwin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31963/elekterika.v22i2.6361

Keywords:

Fuzzy-AHP; off-grid solar PV; battery ownership strategy

Abstract

This study aims to determine the most appropriate battery ownership strategy for hazardous (B3) waste management in off-grid solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in archipelagic regions. The research employs a multi-criteria decision-making approach using the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy-AHP) to accommodate uncertainty in expert judgment. Six evaluation criteria are considered, namely compliance with B3 waste regulations, capital expenditure (CAPEX), operational and maintenance costs (OPEX), availability of B3 temporary storage facilities and inactive asset warehouses (ATTB), availability of technical human resources and occupational safety competence (K3L), and occupational safety and health risks (K3). Three ownership alternatives are analyzed: full ownership, battery leasing (Battery as a Service), and a hybrid scheme combining ownership and service agreement. The results indicate that occupational safety and health risk (0.536) and availability of technical human resources and K3L competence (0.354) are the most influential criteria. Based on the global weighting, the battery leasing scheme achieves the highest priority among the alternatives. This finding suggests that service-based ownership models have the potential to better address operational constraints in remote and archipelagic areas. The study provides insights for decision-makers in selecting appropriate battery management strategies while considering regulatory, technical, economic, and safety aspects.

References

[1] United Nations, “Paris Agreement,” 2015.

[2] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), “Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2023,” International Renewable Energy Agency, 2024.

[3] International Energy Agency (IEA), “Solar PV Global Supply Chains,” 2022.

[4] International Energy Agency (IEA), “Batteries and Secure Energy Transitions,” 2023.

[5] B. Zakeri and S. Syri, “Electrical energy storage systems: A comparative life cycle cost analysis,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 42, pp. 569–596, 2015.

[6] M. Berecibar, I. Gandiaga, I. Villarreal, N. Omar, J. Van Mierlo, and P. Van den Bossche, “Critical review of state of health estimation methods of Li-ion batteries for real applications,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 56, pp. 572–587, 2016.

[7] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and IEA-PVPS, “End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels,” 2016.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-30

Issue

Section

Articles