Author
Abstract
Photovoltaic (PV) modules operating in hot and arid climates suffer from elevated temperatures that degrade electrical efficiency and accelerate aging. While recent review studies have identified phase change materials (PCMs) and sorptive materials as promising passive cooling solutions, their conclusions are largely based on simulations or laboratory-scale investigations, with limited experimental validation under real outdoor conditions. This study presents a direct, experimental comparison of two fundamentally different passive cooling mechanisms: latent heat storage using calcium nitrate tetrahydrate (CNT-PCM) and adsorption-driven evaporative cooling using a green-synthesized MOF-801. Side-by-side outdoor experiments were conducted during spring, summer, and autumn under identical climatic conditions, and the systems were evaluated using a unified thermal, electrical, exergy, economic, and environmental (4E) framework. The CNT-PCM system achieved a maximum surface temperature reduction of 18.2 °C, improved electrical efficiency by 10.9%, and reached an exergy efficiency of 30.7%, while maintaining stable performance over repeated cycles. In contrast, MOF-801 provided a moderate temperature reduction of 4.4 °C and an efficiency improvement of 2.8%, with partial performance degradation observed after cyclic operation. Over a projected 20-year lifetime, the CNT-PCM system could reduce CO2 emissions by 9.6% compared with an uncooled module. Unlike previous review-based conclusions that broadly emphasize the potential of sorptive materials, the present experimental results demonstrate that inorganic PCMs offer more robust and reliable long-term thermal regulation for PV modules under real outdoor conditions. This work provides the first side-by-side field comparison of PCM- and MOF-based PV cooling strategies and offers experimentally grounded guidance for sustainable PV thermal management.
Suggested Citation
Kargaran, Mahyar, 2026.
"Integrating latent heat storage and sorptive cooling for photovoltaic panels: Experimental, exergy, and environmental insights,"
Energy, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:energy:v:348:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226006183
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2026.140515
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:348:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226006183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.