key: cord-0067730-7iqa1s9e
authors: Prabhu, Vishnu S; Shrivastava, Shraddha; Mukhopadhyay, Kakali
title: Life Cycle Assessment of Solar Photovoltaic in India: A Circular Economy Approach
date: 2021-09-18
journal: Circ.Econ.Sust.
DOI: 10.1007/s43615-021-00101-5
sha: b613831b28a50d122c3f157eb9b9032d29c98101
doc_id: 67730
cord_uid: 7iqa1s9e

This pioneering work employs the attributional and comparative life cycle assessment methodology to evaluate India’s ambitious target of installing 100 GW of solar energy by 2022 and the FRELP method to study the circular economy prospects of the substantial PV waste it is expected to generate. Business as usual projections suggest that the intended target will be achieved no sooner than 2029. The lower lifetime of polycrystalline PV modules combined with their lower efficiency is found to severely downgrade their environmental performance vis-à-vis monocrystalline PV modules. The end-of-life treatment of the projected 6,576 tonnes of solar PV waste, expected to be accumulated between 2034-59, indicates a recovery rate of 90.7% entailing electricity consumption, GHG emissions, and monetary cost of 678.6 MWh, 648 tonnes of CO2 eq., and USD 11.8 billion, respectively. Simultaneously, the recovery of aluminum and glass alone leads to a direct saving of 70.3 GWh of energy by eliminating raw material extraction and processing. Further, the economic value of the recovered material at USD 11.74 billion is found to have the potential to generate additional solar capacity worth 19 GW. However, making the end-of-life treatment of PV waste financially feasible would require government subsidization. A minimum amount that would equate the costs to the benefits is USD 690/MW. The study, therefore, intends to inform potential stakeholders about the environmental burden as well as the economic potential of the impending PV waste and concludes with important policy prescriptions for enabling a sustainable energy transition through the circular economy approach.

Introduction expected to reduce the cumulative demand for silicon from 17 Mt to 13.4 Mt by 2040 in Italy, where the high demand for c-Si technology modules has increased demand for high-purity silicon [28] . Analogously, by 2050, PV waste mining could provide 72 -80% of the raw material required to manufacture the Spanish demand of PV modules that year [29] . Even in South Korea, with proper monitoring, collection, and storage of PV waste arranged shortly post-production, the recycling treatment can yield high commercial value for materials recovered from the 4.4 -5.8 million tons of PV waste expected to be accumulated by 2080 [26] .

However, the global status of practice and knowledge for the end-of-life management of crystalline silicon PV modules, especially in the developing countries, is still in its infancy and demands investment in research and development to reduce recycling costs and environmental impacts compared to disposal, while maximizing material recovery [30] . Assuming the latest recycling technology available in Mexico, 75% of 1.2 MT of PV waste expected to be generated by 2045 can be recovered and reused for PV manufacturing [31] . However, Mexico currently does not have the capacity to adopt high-end technologies to achieve this target. Similar is the case for all developing and underdeveloped countries, including India. IEA suggests that by 2050, global PV panel waste is projected to increase to 60-78 million tons while the recoverable value from PV waste could cumulatively exceed USD 15 billion, equivalent to the amount of raw materials needed to produce approximately 2 billion panels, or 630 GW of power-generation capacity [32] . This suggests that the Solar PV has immense potential for accelerating the transition from the conventional linear to the new circular economy concept such that energy resources are retained as available for use in the production cycle for as long as possible, by maximizing economic benefits and minimizing the environmental impacts [33] . In order to harness such a huge potential, strategizing comprehensive policies at the national level becomes important. This would in turn require careful investigation into the dynamics of the solar PV industry to explore the environmental and economic prospects of recycling practices through techno-economic analyzes and LCAs to optimize solutions and minimize trade-offs [30] .

While all the studies discussed thus far are in the context of other countries, a recent study analyzing the circular economy potential from solar PV waste in the end-of-life (EoL) phase in India was undertaken by Gautam et al. [34] . The study uses a forecasting model to project the amount of waste generated by EoL solar PV panels and its balance of system (BOS) using Weibull reliability function for panel failure. For this purpose, the study estimates the annual solar PV installation until 2030. The authors show that 347.5 GW of solar PV installations by 2030 is expected to generate 2.95 billion tonnes of e-waste between 2020 and 2047 with potential recovery of critical metals worth USD 452 trillion at EoL. All these elements form a critical element of the objectives of the present study as well. However, this study goes well beyond its predecessor to undertake a more comprehensive target-based analysis. The broad objectives and the accompanying novelties of this study are listed below:

(1) This pioneering work investigates the circular economy prospects of the world's largest solar capacity expansion in India throughout its lifetime. The LCA analysis is inclusive of upstream as well as downstream activities as the exclusion of the latter is a significant research gap in the literature. To this end, an attributional and comparative LCA is undertaken, to understand the energy and environmental impact of ground-mounted and rooftop solar PV installation using m-Si and p-Si PV technologies at the national level (2) The comparative LCA presented in this study is a novelty in itself, as the literature on LCA of solar PV technology in India remains scattered, limited to a particular solar PV plant in a particular region, with no distinction made between different PV technologies [35, 36] . This study, therefore, attempts to provide a generalized national level framework for studying the energy and environmental impact of solar PV for power generation (3) The study presents a timeline for the probable achievement of the intended target based on which the projections of impending PV waste from the proposed capacity expansion are made. In doing so, this study provides an update to the projection made by IRENA and IEA PVPS [32] by factoring in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, an extension is provided to this study, and other studies estimating the annual and cumulative PV waste generation [37, 28, 31, 34, 38] by estimating the financial costs of recycling as well as the economic value of recovered materials, thereby assessing the PV capacity which can be installed with the help of resale of recovered materials in the Indian context (4) The work comparable to this study is a recent collaborative report on PV waste management in India [39] . While the report provides insights into the recycling rates of various PV waste materials at the end-of-lifetime, the cost of recycling these materials across various stages considers only private costs in terms of transportation, treatment, landfilling costs, etc. The present study goes beyond this constraint to include the external costs in terms of negative environmental impact from the recycling process (5) Additionally, the cumulative breakdown of the type of materials which can be recovered and reused at the end-of-lifetime as well as the energy and environmental gains from substituting virgin material manufacturing with recovered material is estimated (6) Finally, based on the cost-benefit analysis of the PV waste recycling process, the study proposes a minimum threshold for subsidizing PV waste recycling that the policymakers should consider in order to make the process financially viable in India Thus, this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of the circular economy prospects of solar photovoltaic compared to the existing studies in literature. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: First, the Materials and Methods section briefly describes the Indian solar PV industry and the trend of solar PV deployment followed by defining the goal and scope of the LCA study along with the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) analysis. Next, the study provides the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) across the economic, energy, and environmental dimensions. This is followed by the interpretation of these results and the conclusion and policy recommendations at the end of the paper.

The Indian Solar PV Industry

The development and incorporation of solar PV technology were discussed for the first time among Indian policy-makers as early as the 3rd Five Year Plan (1961-66) [39] . Since it was a completely new technology at that time, its incorporation in the Indian power sector was not a natural development. It was only twenty years later in the 6th Five Year Plan (1980-85) that the implementation of solar power capacity for electricity generation was discussed and a Commission for Additional Sources of Energy (CASE) was set up. Soon, the National Solar Photovoltaic Energy Demonstration Program (NASPAD) was implemented under which manufacturing of solar PV cells and modules of 10.35 kW, 21.07 kW, and 31.75 kW was achieved for the first time.

In 2010, the government announced the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) under the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC-2008) under which a target of 22 GW of grid-connected and off-grid power plants was expected to be achieved by 2022 [39] . Though a very conservative target, this was the first national-level solar capacity installation program pursued by the government. Subsequently, the new government in 2015 increased the solar capacity installation target to 100 GW to be achieved by 2022.

By 2014, the cumulative solar installation in the country could reach 3.2 GW only [41] . However, following the announcement of the national RE expansion program in 2015, solar installations saw exponential growth, as demonstrated in Figure 1 .

The highest increase in solar installations of 9.7 GW was witnessed in 2017 which corresponded to a 123% year-on-year increase. Since then, the solar industry has witnessed a negative capacity installation growth rate, which can be attributed to the economic slowdown, liquidity crunch, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic [45] .

As of December 2020, only 38.4 GW of the 100 GW target was achieved, implying that by the end of 2022, a total of 61.7 GW or approximately 30 GW installations per year is required. Table 1 gives the share of rooftop PV and ground-mounted PV installation yet to be achieved.

With an average of 6.5 GW installation achieved in the last five years and the slowdown induced by the current pandemic, meeting this target in the given period of time seems unrealistic. Accordingly, the next section presents a projection for the probable achievement of the cumulative PV capacity, keeping in mind the past trend.

The c-Si PV technology currently dominates the solar PV market, constituting 95% of the global market, while the share of thin amorphous technology remains minimal with limited information on its LCI [11] . This study, therefore, analyzes the share of the proposed capacity expansion based on c-Si PV technology only. In the absence of market share information of solar PV technologies in the Indian context, the study uses the global market share as a proxy for the Indian solar market. Accordingly, the projection is made for 95 GW of c-Si PV module capacity expansion, . Source: [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] corresponding to 95% of the proposed 100 GW solar capacity expansion to be achieved by 2022. The projection of installed capacity is made using the E3-India model, an impact assessment tool developed from the internationally recognized E3ME global model framework.

The model is used to simulate the effects of economic and energy policies in India. Based on the Keynes-Leontief-Klein framework, the model is designed to provide policymakers a multidimensional policy impact analysis to assess the merits of a policy from the Economy-Energy-Environment standpoint. The feedback mechanism between these three dimensions is shown in Figure 2 .

The economy module of the E3-India model provides the measure of economic activity and general price levels to the energy module. The energy module is constructed for each of the 21 energy users, disaggregated by five energy carrier for each region (see Table 11 in the Appendix). Based on the power generation technology and disaggregated energy user data, CO2 emissions are estimated in the environment (emissions) module.

Given the importance of data quality for econometric models, E3-India model's database has been compiled with substantial effort. The baseline or the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario has been constructed by an extrapolation of previous sectoral growth rates compiled in the E3-India model's database. The model further adopts a method of calibration for scaling the forecasted values such that the model baseline is consistent with the constructed baseline. The projected timeframe for the completion of the intended solar PV capacity target, along with the annual capacity addition, as suggested by the BAU baseline of the E3-India model, is presented in Figure 3 . For 2029, only the net capacity addition required to meet the 95 GW target is shown. Figure 3 indicates that the proposed installation of 95 GW of c-Si PV modules will be achieved by 2029. This is an important result, highlighting the large degree of variation in the year of completion of solar installations vis-à-vis the official target year of 2022. The break-up of the forecasted yearly installations according to the PV system (Rooftop and Groundmounted PV) and PV technology (m-Si and p-Si) is presented in Table 12 in the Appendix. For this purpose, the share of m-Si and p-Si PV technologies in the c-Si solar PV market in India is assumed to be at par with their global share, i.e., 69.37% and 30.63% [11] .

With a reliable timeframe for the achievement of the 95 GW capacity target, the next section lays out the goal and scope definition for performing a LCA of the intended solar capacity expansion.

This study deals with the attributional and comparative LCA of the 95 GW c-Si solar capacity expansion in India. The attributional LCA is conducted to measure the direct energy and environmental impact of the capacity expansion for ground-mounted PV and rooftop PV systems throughout its lifetime, and the comparative LCA is conducted to compare this impact across m-Si and p-Si PV technologies.

For this analysis, the total effective area of a 1 kW m-Si or p-Si PV system is assumed to be 10m 2 [35, 47] . Some of the harmonized characteristics defined for the purpose of this analysis are given below.

i. Solar irradiationthe amount of energy received from the sun per unit area of solar PV panel is assumed to be 1700 kWh/m 2 /year in India [48] ii. Performance ratiothe ratio of the actual electrical energy generated by PV plant to the theoretically possible electrical energy generated by the PV plant is assumed to be 0.75 in India [20] iii. Module efficiency -the percentage of sunlight on the panel that is converted into electricity is assumed to be 14% for m-Si and 13.2% for p-Si PV technology in India [49] The phases considered for the analysis range from resource extraction until EoL treatment, whereby the energy and environmental assessment of the production, construction, and operational phases is explained using LCA indicators such as Energy Pay Back Time (EPBT), Energy Return on Investment (EROI), and GHG Emission Rate, while the EoL assessment is done using the Full Recovery End-of-Life Photovoltaic (FRELP) method to incorporate the circular economy approach. The distinction also arises due to the variability in the functional unit reported in the literature for the respective phases, where the energy requirement for EoL is measured in per tonnage rather than in per m 2 terms, as is the case for the first three phases.

The LCI step entails data collection and compilation for inputs (such as energy requirement and raw materials), intermediate processes, and outputs (such as GHG emissions and solid/liquid waste) for all the phases included in the study. This study takes into account energy and emission flows over four distinct phases in the process of electricity generation by means of photovoltaic panels. These include the production, construction, operation, and EoL phases, discussed in the following sections. The per-unit energy requirement (embodied energy) as inputs across the first three phases has been compiled for m-Si and p-Si PV technology with respect to the Groundmounted PV and Rooftop PV systems, and is summarized in Table 2 . For the national level analysis, the LCI has been compiled from the latest secondary sources available with sufficient geographical and technical correlation. The reason behind this approximation is the paucity of data due to the absence of macro-level LCA of solar PV in the Indian context. Thus, in order to undertake this novel analysis, the study has to rely on the more comprehensively documented European solar PV LCA studies for preparing the LCI. The LCI for the EoL phase is collated using the FRELP method. The recovered materials from PV waste at the EoL phase are quantified to measure the circular economy prospects in terms of the potential savings in energy and GHG emissions in the forthcoming production phase by substituting virgin materials with recovered materials. Accordingly, the system boundaries of this study is schematised in Figure 4 , consisting of the four phases of the 95 GW c-Si solar PV systems, based on the Circular Economy approach.

In this stage, the silicon feedstock is procured as raw material which then goes through a series of scientific procedures [18, 34] : First, the metallurgical-grade silicon (MG-Si) is prepared by carbothermic reduction of silicon-oxide (SiO 2 ) or silica from quartz sand. Second, the electronic grade-silicon (EG-Si) is produced from MG-Si which is a highly purified version and will be used in silicon wafers. Third, for m-Si PV, the EG-Si undergoes the highly energy-intensive Czochralski Process (Cz process) which operates at temperatures of 1100-1200°C and crystallizes the silicon to form a single crystal ingot of silicon. On the other hand, the p-Si PV does not require Cz process, hence, its energy requirement is always lower than m-Si PV. Next, the cell fabrication undergoes high-temperature diffusion, oxidation, and deposition after which the solar cells are interconnected with copper ribbon, encapsulated layer, and assembling of aluminum frame and tempered glass to form a PV module. The stepwise procedure for this phase is shown in Figure 5 .

The transformation of metallic silicon into solar silicon and the panel assembling is considered as the most energy-intensive steps in the manufacturing of solar panels due to the great electricity consumption in the former (even when the most efficient conversion technology is considered) and the use of highly energy-intensive materials like aluminum frame and glass roofing in the latter [22] . However, since LCA study on solar PV is minimal in the Indian context, the embodied energy LCI is not available for PV module manufacturing in India. Thus, this study relies on data collected from European studies. The embodied energy requirement for this entire phase is reported as 1083 kWh/m2 for m-Si PV and 836 kWh/m2 for p-Si PV module manufacturing [49, 52] . As the European nations are technologically more advanced than India, the values reported by these studies can serve as the minimum thresholds in the Indian context.

The ground-mounted PV, which is installed in large open areas, has higher levels of sophistication per kW of PV panel compared to rooftop PV construction, owing to factors such as preparation of foundation, land leveling, and fencing. Thus, the energy requirement in general will be higher for ground-mounted PV compared to rooftop PV. In the absence of national level estimates of embodied energy requirement for this phase, the study relies on the estimates proposed by a sub-national LCA which reported the respective values to be approximately 533 kWh/m2 and 233 kWh/m2 for ground-mounted and rooftop PV systems, respectively [34] . Since the main difference between m-Si and p-Si PV systems lies in the cell fabrication, the embodied energy for these two technologies is assumed to be the same across construction and operation phases. 

The operational phase constitutes cleaning of panels, repair, or replacement of any electronic/ electrical component throughout the PV system's life-cycle. Here again, due to the larger scale of installation and supporting structures for ground-mounted PV, it has higher embodied energy requirements compared to rooftop PV. The embodied energy estimates for this stage are also based on the sub-national LCA discussed in the construction phase. For this phase, the respective energy requirement was reported as 155 kWh/m 2 and 125 kWh/m 2 for ground-mounted and rooftop systems, respectively [35] .

The per-unit phase-wise embodied energy requirement is summarized in Table 2 .

The EoL treatment of solar PV waste varies by the technology used. While clear differences have been highlighted between the EoL treatment of c-Si and thin-film amorphous panels, not much distinction has been made between the energy requirement for recycling of m-Si and p-Si PV modules [53, 54] . Thus, this paper evaluates the EoL treatment of c-Si technology PV waste for m-Si and p-Si PV modules combined.

As of now, India does not have any regulations for EoL recycling treatment designed specifically for PV waste. In fact, it is only the European Union which has a legislative framework in place for the recycling and disposal of PV waste materials as part of the producers' responsibility [55] . The EU solar industry has also established "PV CYCLE," an initiative to study innovative business models to undertake PV recycling systems more efficiently. The Full Recovery End-of-Life Photovoltaic (FRELP) method, prepared by an Italian PV Waste recycling company, SASIL S.p.A, in collaboration with PV CYCLE is considered to be the most advanced PV recycling system till date, expected to decrease lifetime environmental impact by 10-15% compared to other recycling methods [53] . The EoL treatment of PV waste using FRELP method is broadly covered in fifteen steps, demonstrated in Figure 6 .

The FRELP method indicates that the embodied energy requirement for the entire EoL treatment of c-Si PV modules is 113.55 kWh/tonne of PV waste. The standard composition of a c-Si PV panel (per tonne) and the amount of materials that can be recovered from the same, as suggested by the FRELP method, is presented in Tables 13 and 14 in the Appendix. These tables reveal that 88.5% of the total materials in a PV module is composed of aluminum and glass, with almost 98% of both being recoverable.

Furthermore, the net monetary cost of PV recycling or EoL treatment using the FRELP method can be estimated as the difference between the total cost incurred during recycling, transportation, and disposal and the benefit gained from the materials and energy recovered during the process. The total cost can further be divided into private costs (investment, processing, and transportation fuel costs) and external costs (air, water, and land pollution) [54] . The total cost breakdown of the FRELP method is presented in Table 15 in the Appendix. The table indicates that a net benefit of USD 1.19/ m2 is registered from PV recycling, even after the external costs are considered [54] .

Energy and Environmental Implications Using Attributional and Comparative LCA

The energy and environmental indicators reported in this section are with reference to the production, construction, and operational phases. The end-of-life or decommissioning phase is analyzed separately in the next section due to disparity in the documentation of data as the energy requirement for the end-of-life phase is available in tonnes of PV waste while the energy requirement for the first three lifecycle phases, namely, production, construction, and operation phases, is reported in kwh/m 2 of PV modules.

The parameters presented in this section include the Energy Pay Back Time (EPBT), energy return on energy investment (EROI), and GHG emission rate. EPBT is defined as the time required for the solar PV system to generate the same amount of energy used in its entire life cycle. The formula for calculating the same is given by Eq. 1.

Source: [56] Where, i) CED: Cumulative Energy Demand of a PV system, calculated as a sum of the embodied energy starting from raw materials extraction up to construction, and the decommissioning phase. Excluding the decommissioning phase due to the disparity in data units, the CED will comprise of the embodied energy in the production and construction phase only.

ii) E agen: Annual electricity generation, given by Eq. 2

Source: [56] iii) E O&M: Embodied Energy for Operational Phase iv) η G: Conversion efficiency, i.e., the average life-cycle primary energy to electricity conversion at the demand side. It is assumed to be 20% [57] .

Based on the embodied energy inventory presented in Table 2 , the EPBT for m-Si and p-Si PV technologies for ground-mounted PV and rooftop PV is presented in Table 3 .

EROI is defined as the ratio of the usable energy returned during a system's operating life, to all the energy needed to make this energy usable. Higher EROI implies higher efficiency in terms of producing economically useful energy output. Moreover, as a dimensionless ratio, EROI can be used for analyzing and comparing different types of technologies [58] . Thus, EROI helps to evaluate the long-term viability of a PV system by looking at the overall energy performance over its entire lifetime [47] . It can be calculated using Eq. 3.

Source: [49] The resulting EROI are presented in Table 4 . 

The GHG emissions rate is a useful index for evaluating the effectiveness of a PV system in the context of global warming. This can be calculated by determining the total GHG emissions during a life cycle divided by the total amount of annual power generation over its lifetime, as presented in Eq. 4 [18] .

Source: [18] Where total GHG emission during lifecycle can be calculated on the basis of lifetime embodied energy, presented in Table 2 . Assuming that the embodied energy throughout the life-cycle of solar PV will be met from coal-fired thermal power plants (TPPs), the total GHG emissions generated throughout the life-time of the m-Si and p-Si PV systems can be calculated using Eq. 5. Replacing Eq. 5 in Eq. 4, the GHG emission rate across PV technology and PV systems can be found. The result for the same is presented in Table 5 .

Based on the LCI for embodied energy presented in Table 2 , the phase-wise lifetime embodied energy of 95 GW capacity of m-Si and p-Si modules for ground-mounted PV and rooftop PV can be calculated. For this purpose, the unit of measurement was converted from kWh/m2 to kWh/ 10m2 to measure the energy flows per kW of solar PV capacity. This was then used to calculate the embodied energy for 95 GW solar capacity and the results are presented in Table 6 . Based on the cumulative embodied energy, the total GHG emission during lifecycle for 95 GW capacity can be calculated using Eq. 5. The results for the phase-wise lifetime GHG emissions from 95 GW m-Si and p-Si solar PV modules are presented in Table 7 .

The cumulative embodied energy and GHG emissions are calculated on an annual basis as well, based on the yearly installations presented in Table 12 in the appendix. The result for the same is presented in Table 16 in the Appendix. The annual GHG emissions have been calculated using Eq. Eq. 6.

Embodied energy  Avg CO2eq intensity for electricity generation from coal Lifetime of PV System ð6Þ

Source: [35] Having evaluated the energy and environmental implications during the first three phases of solar PV in this section, the next section evaluates the prospects of the circular economy approach in the EoL phase.

The 95 GW worth of c-Si PV modules will generate approximately 6,576 tonnes of waste at its EoL 2 . However, the total 6,576 tonnes of PV waste will not be generated all at once. With a life time of 30 and 25 years for m-Si and p-Si modules, respectively, PV waste will start accumulating annually once the solar modules reach the end of their life time. This timeframe ranges between 2034 and 2059 for the 95 GW capacity installed until 2029. Figure 7 presents the annual and cumulative waste generation which is expected to accumulate from 2034 onward. The annual PVwaste generation segregated by PV system and technology is presented in Table 17 in the appendix.

Based on the composition of one tonne of PV waste presented by Latunussa et al. [53] (see Table 13 in the appendix), the material-wise composition of the 6,576 tonnes PV waste is calculated and presented in Table 8 .

Using the material recovery information from the FRELP method presented in Table 14 in the appendix, the expected material recovered from 95 GW or 6,576 tonnes of PV waste is shown in Table 9 .

As per the FRELP method, approximately 90.7% of PV materials can be recovered from 6,576 tonnes of PV waste with the process entailing electricity consumption and GHG emissions of 678.6 MWh and 648 tonnes of CO2 eq., respectively.

With the help of the cost benefit analysis presented by Markert, Celik & Apul (2020) (see Table 15 in the appendix), the total private and external costs of recycling 95 GW of c-Si PV waste and the commercial value of recovered materials (aluminum, glass, silver, silicon, and copper) are calculated and presented in Table 10 . Private costs include the cost of investment, processing, transportation, and disposal while the external costs are from Cumulative Energy Demand, Global Warming potential, acidification, freshwater toxicity, particulate matter, etc.

Thus, the EoL treatment of 95 GW c-Si modules will entail a net loss of USD 65 million.

The study reports the energy requirement levels of a crystalline-silicon PV module to range from 1194 -1771 kWh/m 2 , varying by the PV technology and mode of installation, which is in line with the broad range of crystalline-silicon PV module energy requirement levels of 150 -1845 kWh/m 2 reported in the literature [19] . The study also finds the more efficient monocrystalline PV modules to be more energy and emission intensive with higher EPBT than polycrystalline PV modules for each mode of installation, a finding that has been extensively documented in the past [18] . Moreover, the study adds to the literature through two novel findings. First, by distinguishing the PV technology by mode of installation, the study finds that ground-mounted polycrystalline PV systems are more energy and emission-intensive than rooftop monocrystalline PV systems, as indicated by the higher EPBT of the former. The mode of installation, therefore, becomes an important factor influencing the environmental performance of the two PV technologies as ground-mounted PV systems entail higher energy requirement. Second, the study finds that the advantage that polycrystalline PV systems have over monocrystalline PV systems in terms of environmental performance vanishes when the lower lifetime of the former is accounted for along with its lower efficiency. This is shown by the lower EROI and higher GHG emission rate of polycrystalline PV systems for each mode of installation. Thus, the lower efficiency of polycrystalline PV technology does not hurt its environmental performance as much as its lower lifetime. Given that GHG emission is inversely proportional to the lifetime [18] , increasing polycrystalline lifetime from 25 to 30 years can reduce its GHG emission rate from 346.6 gCO2eq/kWh to 288.9 gCO2eq/kWh for ground-mounted systems and from 271.5 gCO2eq/ kWh to 226.3 gCO2eq/kWh for rooftop systems, at the same module efficiency of 13.2%. This will also make polycrystalline PV systems regain its competitive edge over monocrystalline PV systems in terms of environmental performance. Similarly, assuming a lifetime of 30 years for both monocrystalline and polycrystalline PV modules, Yue et al, [49] report the EROI for the later to be higher than that of the former. However, by accounting for the shorter lifetime of polycrystalline PV technology, the study demonstrates the impact of lifetime of a PV system on its long-term environmental viability.

In terms of phase-wise energy and emission intensity, the production phase accounts for 55-75% of the total embodied energy requirement and GHG emissions, depending on the PV technology and mode of installation. This can be attributed to massive electricity consumption in transforming metallic silicon into solar silicon and the use of highly energy-intensive materials like aluminum and glass in panel assembling [22] . The most effective way, therefore, to improve the modules' environmental performance is to reduce the energy input in the manufacturing phase of the modules, provided other parameters remain constant [21] . For this reason, incorporating the circular economy approach in the solar PV lifecycle becomes inevitable. With the help of FRELP analysis, the study finds that 90.7% of the PV waste resulting from 95 GW worth of solar PV systems can be recovered at EoL. This includes a substantial portion of the most energy-intensive components of a solar PV module, aluminum, and glass. In terms of the proportion of PV waste that can be recovered at EoL, Aluminum frame 1,184 3.

Copper connector 66 4.

Polymer-based adhesive (EVA) encapsulation layer (from cables) 335 5.

Back-sheet layer (based on polyvinyl fluoride) 99 6.

Silicon metal solar cell 240 7. Silver 3 8.

Aluminum, internal conductor 35 9.

Copper, internal conductor 7 10.

Various metal (tin, lead) 3 Total 6,576 this study provides an update to the proportion reported by Gautam et al, [34] , which estimates only 70% of the PV waste to be recoverable. Furthermore, going beyond the economic savings reported by Gautam et al. [34] , the present study incorporates the corresponding energy and emission savings from the recovery of raw materials at EoL. The amount of aluminum and glass recovered at the EoL, as shown in Table 9 , will lead to a direct saving of 51.53 GWh and 18.8 GWh of energy, respectively. Correspondingly, the savings in CO2 emissions will amount to 9.8 tonnes CO2 and 3.8 tonnes CO2, respectively 3 . The cost-benefit analysis of the EoL treatment presented in the study reports a loss of USD 65 million. However, when viewed as a proportion of the total cost, this loss amounts to less than 1%. On the other hand, the cost of purchasing virgin raw materials is nearly seven times the cost of recovering them through recycling [54] . The significant difference between the costs can be attributed to the energy and cost-intensive extraction of raw materials that their recovery does not entail. For instance, 94.3% of the most expensive component of a PV module, silver, is recovereable through EoL treatment. Prioritizing its recovery can bring down the private and external cost of PV module manufacturing substantially. Similar is the case of silicon, which has a recovery rate of 95%. Thus, despite the loss, recycling of the PV waste is a more economical option vis-à-vis manufacturing virgin material. However, the upfront loss is bound to discourage manufacturers from opting for EoL treatment. In such a situation, the onus is on the government to undertake subsidization of EoL treatment to make it financially feasible. While the Government of India has allocated 30% of the project cost as subsidy with an intention of promoting investment in domestic solar equipment manufacturing to counter cheaper imports from China [60] , no fiscal incentive has been provided for the downstream processes. A forward-looking strategy, however, requires immediate attention to be directed toward enabling EoL treatment to manage the impending PV waste accumulation, which will be generated irrespective of whether manufacturing is indigenised or not. A subsidy would in effect reduce the private cost of recycling by an equal amount. Thus, a breakeven point is to equate the subsidy to the loss i.e. USD 65 million. However, the entire PV waste evaluated in the study will not be treated at once, so an equivalent amount would be equal to USD 690/MW. Moreover, incentivizing investment in EoL treatment will require a profit margin for the investors. Therefore, this break-even amount is the minimum threshold and the point of reference that the government should look at while deciding the extent of the subsidy. Another way to highlight the positive environmental impact of the EoL treatment is to look at the potential capacity that can be installed from the economic value of the recovered materials. The study finds that the economic value of recovered materials from 95 GW c-Si PV waste is approximately equal to USD 11.74 billion as shown in Table 10 . With an installation cost of USD 618/kW in India which is currently the lowest in the world [61], approximately 19 GW of solar capacity can be installed from the economic value of the recovered materials.

In an attempt to achieve the twin objectives of energy security and energy sustainability, India has undertaken the world's largest RE capacity expansion program of which solar energy is the largest component. The target is to achieve 100 GW of installed solar capacity by 2022. With nearly 40% of the target achieved so far, meeting the target by 2022 seems unlikely. To address the uncertainty about the probable achievement of the target, the study presents a timeframe for the same, according to which the target is likely to be achieved by 2029. In stating so, the study counters the projections provided by Gautam et al. [34] , which estimates the installed solar capacity to reach 347.5 GW by 2030. However, given that the study does not take into account the slowdown induced by the COVID-19 pandemic and its anticipated prolonged impact, this projection seems highly ambitious. Furthermore, the study undertakes the attributional and comparative LCA to evaluate the energy and environmental impact of solar PV installation using m-Si and p-Si PV technologies in India and reports its findings through indicators such as EPBT, EROI, and GHG emission rate. The study relies on comprehensively documented European data sources since, to the best knowledge of the authors, the macro-level solar PV LCA studies have not been conducted thus far in the Indian context. The results highlight an important finding: the extant literature claiming the superiority of polycrystalline PV technology over monocrystalline technology in terms of environmental performance needs to be assessed critically in the context of the mode of installation and difference in lifetime. Next, the study projects the amount of PV waste that will accumulate at the end-of-life time from the capacity expansion, expected to accumulate 2034 onward. By incorporating an in-depth analysis of the end-of-life phase using the FRELP method to understand the circular economy prospects of the Indian Solar Industry, this study provides a novel extension to existing LCA studies, unparalleled in literature. Results indicate that the energy recovery from PV waste recycling is tremendous which will remain unutilized if such downstream operations are not prioritized. Moreover, the reuse of recovered aluminum, glass, silver, and silicon in the manufacture of PV modules can be significantly beneficial not only from the energy-environment standpoint but also from the economic perspective as the economic value of the recovered material can help in installing approximately 19 GW of additional solar capacity. At the same time, there are some materials such as lead and tin which cannot be recovered and are disposed of as solid/liquid waste at the end-of-life time. Thus, responsible handling of PV waste is crucial to minimize the harmful impact on the environment as well as on human health. This in turn requires a comprehensive legislative framework, currently missing in India. Furthermore, there is no accountability or delineation of responsibilities among the producer or governmental institutions for PV waste recycling which can further delay the process. In this direction, the study presents a cost-benefit analysis of the end-of-life treatment of the cumulative PV waste to inform the policymakers of the likely cost to be incurred. The results indicate a net loss of USD 65 million from the process, however, when evaluated in context of the energy and environmental benefits and compared with the cost of virgin materials, recycling turns out to be the preferred option. In order to make this financially feasible, it is suggested that the government considers subsidization of the end-of-life treatment of PV waste. No loss-no gain scenario would require a subsidy of USD 690/MW, however, keeping the incentive for investors in mind, the study suggests that the actual subsidy should be greater than this break-even value. Determining the optimal amount of this subsidy can be a subject for future research. Meanwhile, by presenting a national energy and environment framework constituting LCA and circular economy approach for the c-Si PV modules, this study intends to serve as a reference for future studies with focus on policy implications. A possible limitation of the study lies in the exclusion of the energy and environmental burden of manufacturing of selected raw materials 4 from the raw material acquisition phase of the LCA. Inclusion of this aspect will result in higher energy and environmental burden than reported in this study. A precise estimate of the extent of this impact is a potential avenue for future research. Another opportunity for future research lies in extending the current study by conducting a consequential LCA of solar PV installation using the input-output approach.

Funding The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Data Availability Not applicable.

Code Availability Not applicable. 

Per capita consumption of electricity in India

Vision of the government is '24x7 Power for All

Electricity generation in India: present state, future outlook and policy implications

Climate action tracker

Year end review -solar power target reset to one lakh MW. Retrieved from Press Information

Report of the expert group on 175 GW RE by 2022. Niti Aayog, Government of India

Retrieved from Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

Global Energy & CO2 Status Report. The latest trends in energy and emissions

Solar energy: potential and future prospects

Assessment of the environmental performance of solar photovoltaic technologies. Environment Canada and Canmet Energy

Photovoltaics Report. Fraunhofer Institute of Solar Energy Systems

A review on global solar energy policy

Profitable climate change mitigation: the case of greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits enabled by solar photovoltaic systems

Grid connected solar photovoltaic system as a tool for green house gas emission reduction in Turkey

The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change

Potential of solar energy in developing countries for reducing energyrelated emissions

Evaluation of technical improvements of photovoltaic systems through life cycle assessment methodology

Environmental management -life cycle assessment -requirements and guidelines. Retrieved from International Organization for Standardization

Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: a review

Meta-analysis of life cycle assessment studies on solar photovoltaic systems

Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of crystalline silicon photovoltaic electricity generation

Parameters affecting the life cycle performance of PV technologies and systems

Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation. Energy

Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar PV and wind energy: a crital metasurvey

Circular economy and sustainability: the past, the present and the future directions

A review of circular economy studies in developed countries and its potential adoption in developing countries

PV waste management at the crossroads of circular economy and energy transition: the case of South Korea

Life cycle assessment for a solar energy system based on reuse components for developing countries

Photovoltaic waste assessment in Italy

Projection of the photovoltaic waste in Spain until 2050

Research and development priorities for silicon photovoltaic module recycling to support a circular economy

Photovoltaic waste assessment in Mexico. Resources, Conservation & Recycling

End-of-life management. Solar photovoltaic panels. International Renewable Energy Agency and International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme

Linear Economy versus circular economy: a comparative and analyzer study for optimization of economy for sustainability

End-of-life solar photovoltaic e-waste assessment in India: a step towards a circular economy

Embodied energy analysis of photovoltaic (PV) system based on macro-and micro level

Energy pay back period and carbon pay back period for solar photovoltaic power plant

Comparative Analysis of State of Play & Recommendations. EU-India: Technical Cooperation -Energy Project

Evolution of solar energy in India: a review

Q4 2016 India solar market update -2016 solar installations to reach 4 GW

Mercom India Research

India solar market

Q2 2020 India solar market update -205 MW INSTALLED IN Q2 2020. Retrieved from MERCOM India

India on pace to install 65 GW of solar by 2022, far off the 100 GW goal

Q1 2020 India solar market update -1,080 MW installed in Q1 2020

E3-India manual 2020. Cambridge: Cambridge Econometrics

DIY calculation guide for 1 kW solar system. Retrieved from Home Scape by Amplus Solar

Global Solar Atlas

Domestic and overseas manufacturing scenarios of silicon-based photovoltaics: life cycle energy and environmental comparative analysis

Degradation of mono-crystalline photovoltaic modules after 22 years of

Solar panel efficiency and lifespan. Retrieved from Solar Energy for Us: https:// solarenergyforus.com/solar-panel-efficiency-lifespan/#:~:text=highest%20efficiency%20for% 20polycrystalline%20cell

Review of life cycle analyses and embodied energy requirements of single crystalline and multi-crystalline silicon photovoltaic systems

Analysis of material recovery from silicon photovoltaic panels. Publications Office of the European Union

Private and externality costs and benefit of recycling crystalline silicon (c-Si) photovoltaic panels. Energies 13

Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and the COuncil of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)

IEA PVPS Task 12. International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power systems Programme

Most efficienct solar panels 2020

A Comprehensive Guide to Solar Energy Systems. With Special Focus on Photovoltaic Systems

Embodied energy demystified

Renewable power generation costs in 2019

Management of end-of-life photovoltaic panels as a step towards a circular economy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2934-2945