Exergy and Energy Analysis of Bifacial PV Module Performance on a Cloudy Day in Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Bifacial solar modules, capable of harvesting sunlight from both sides, present a promising pathway for sustainable energy generation. This study examines the performance of bifacial modules on a cloudy day through comparative exergy and energy analyses. The analysis considers both the quality and quantity of energy produced by bifacial and monofacial modules. Conducted at Qassim University in Buraydah City, Saudi Arabia, the study recorded measurements during two intervals on a cloudy day using a real-time photovoltaic measurement system. Module performance was evaluated concerning energy yield, exergy yield, and solar irradiance, factoring in ambient and module temperatures. The results demonstrate that bifacial modules outperformed monofacial modules in electrical energy and output exergy. In the first period, the bifacial modules showed a 9.5% higher exergy efficiency and a 7% greater energy efficiency compared to the monofacial modules. During the second period, the bifacial modules achieved a 4.5% higher exergy efficiency and a 3.5% increased energy efficiency over the monofacial modules. These findings contribute to global sustainability efforts by reducing fossil fuel dependence and optimizing bifacial PV module design and operation for enhanced energy and exergy efficiency, even in cloudy conditions. The study’s implications for sustainable development and energy policies underscore the essential role of advanced PV technologies in achieving sustainable energy goals.

1. Introduction

Fossil fuel combustion has become a serious threat to our environmental health as it is attributed to greenhouse gases. The most effective way to solve this problem is to utilize more renewable energy sources instead of fossil sources [1,2]. Renewable energy resources have gained attention among policymakers around the world for electricity generation [3]. In renewable energy resources, solar energy is a promising resource for electricity generation and clean energy demand [4]. Solar energy is converted to electricity using the PV solar cell devices made from typical semiconductor materials [5]. These solar thermal systems form a hybrid unit where they capture both heat and electricity, so these systems need significant attention to produce high conversion efficacy [6]. Hence, the bifacial photovoltaic cells are promising technologies in PV technology development as these solar cells are known for their double-sided capacity to generate energy which was not present in the earlier form of solar panels [6]. The International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaics (ITRPV) has endorsed the rising popularity and efficiency of bifacial technology while anticipating its 70% market share by 2025 [7]. Bifacial photovoltaic modules have been found to increase the electricity production through the use of light absorption from the albedo [8]. Therefore, several researchers have conducted the performance analysis of bifacial photovoltaic solar modules.

Sun et al. [9] demonstrated the optimization of bifacial solar panels at a low albedo of 0.25, the bifacial gain of ground-mounted bifacial modules is less than 10%. However, by elevating the modules one meter above the ground and adjusting the albedo to 0.5, the bifacial gain can be improved to 30%. The authors discover that ground-mounted, vertical, east–west-facing bifacial modules will outperform their south–north-facing, optimally inclined counterparts by up to 15% below the latitude of 30° at an albedo of 0.5 [9]. For the calculation of the annual incident irradiation, two types of deployments have to be made. First, the bifacial PV panels are installed with an optimal tilt angle facing south. Second, the bifacial PV panels are fixed in a vertical position, in a way that faces the east–west direction. Liang and Pravettoni [10] explored the pre-normative activity causing the draft standard IEC 60904-1-2 in their study, with a central focus on indoor measurement with a single-source simulator. The experiment had metrological challenges for selecting the non-reflective material on the non-illuminated side and its effect on the electrical characterization of bifacial modules [10]. This prior study showed that bifacial solar energy and exergy efficiencies are analyzed through environmental conditions such as illumination intensity, and albedo. Ahmed et al. [11] assessed the power, exergy, and energy efficacies with these measured parameters such as solar irradiance, atmospheric temperature, and module temperature installed at Poornima University, Jaipur. The power conversion efficiency varied at 7.98 and 10.49%, exergy efficiency varied at 4.5 and 8.93%, the energy efficiency varied at 11.08 and 14.50%. Furthermore, Aoun et al. [12] experimentally studied the mono-crystalline PV performance in terms of energy, exergy, and power energy efficiencies on cloudy days. Power energy efficiency (16.0%), energy efficiency (22.3%), and exergy efficiency (12.0%) were obtained.

The photovoltaic modules generate electricity from a specific range of light frequencies and cannot cover the whole solar range of infrared, ultraviolet, and diffused light. Hence, much of the striking sunlight energy is wasted by the solar modules; therefore, the energy and exergy analysis were determined for the performance of a solar photovoltaic module [3]. In the exergy analysis, both exergy efficiency and exergy destruction highlight the energy inefficiencies in a system and provide useful information to the decision-makers for prioritizing the improvement potential. Exergy analysis is generally an applicable method for the comparison of alternative processes for a given purpose. Exergy analysis uses the thermodynamic strategy to evaluate and improve the system’s efficiency so that exergy destruction can be used to optimize the economic performance of the systems [13,14]. Additionally, Raina and Sinha [15] conducted a comparative study concerning monofacial and bifacial cells in the same conditions. Singh et al. [16] used simultaneous front and rear side illumination in their study, which is also called bifacial illumination, for characterizing bifacial PV modules using standard monofacial (indoor current–voltage measurements taken from the front and rear sides of the bifacial module, whereas the other side was protected by a non-reflecting black cover [16].

Based on the related work, it can be inferred that this study presents an energy and exergy analysis with a comparative analysis of bifacial and monofacial modules during a cloudy day conducted in Saudi Arabia. Abdallah et al. [17] looked into how well monofacial and bifacial modules worked in the dry state of Qatar when they were arranged at a 22° tilt. The bifacial module exhibited a 15% higher energy yield in comparison to the monofacial module. On a clear sky day, the authors discovered that the normalized maximum power produced by the bifacial module was 12% higher than the normalized maximum power produced by the monofacial configuration. Therefore, the authors conducted an experimental study to map the efficiency of bifacial PV modules. This experiment aimed to examine the performance under weather conditions, particularly on overcast days when efficiency tends to decrease in the Qassim region of Saudi Arabia. The bifacial PV module performance is analyzed through the measurement of I–V characteristics where the solar cell is connected to a flexible resistive load. So, this load varies between short circuit and open circuit conditions while both the voltage and current in the output terminals of the PV cell are measured [18].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the Experimental Setup

The south-facing bifacial PV module was installed at the QASSIM university campus in Buraydah City, Saudi Arabia (26.34 N, 43.76 E), and its specifications are stated in

Table 1. PV module characteristics.

PV Module Characteristics	Module 1 (Monofacial) LONGI (LR672-PE-360M)		Module 2 (Bifacial) LONGI (LR4-72HBD-435M)
Technology	Mono PERC		Bifacial PERC Half—cut
Dimensions (mm)	1956 × 991 × 40 mm		2094 × 1038 × 35 mm
Number of cells	72		144
Test Condition	STC	NOCT	STC	NOCT
Maximum Power (W)	300	266.7	435	324.9
Maximum Current (A)	9.18	7.36	10.66	8.54
Maximum Voltage (V)	39.2	36.2	40.8	38.0
Short Circuit Current (A)	9.70	7.82	11.36	9.18
Open Circuit Voltage (V)	47.9	44.7	49.1	45.9
Module Efficiency (%)	18.6		20.0

STC (Standard Testing Condition): Irradiance: 1000 W/m², Cell Temperature: 25 °C, Spectra at AM1.5; NOCT (Nominal Operating Cell Temperature): Irradiance: 800 W/m², Ambient Temperature: 20 °C, Spectra at AM1.5, Wind at 1 m/s.

. Figure 1 shows the global and diffuse irradiance on the horizontal surface in addition to the ambient temperature which were recorded on the day of the experiment by a nearby meteorological station. The experiment was conducted on a cloudy day (when more than 50% of the sky is obscured by clouds), with multiple readings recorded during two periods along the day—Period 1 (11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.) and Period 2 (3 p.m.–4:30 p.m.). The readings were ambient temperature, solar radiance, and the temperature of the PV module, along with the operational quantities, which included I_sc, V_m, FF, I_m, P_m, V_oc, and the I–V curves.

The PV modules used in the study were made of monocrystalline Silicon PERC and their main characteristics are provided in Table 1. These modules were fixed with a standardized mounting system at the tilt angle of 26.34° in the south direction. The modules were elevated at 1 m above the ground as shown in Figure 2.

2.2. Instrumentation and Technique

In this study, the PV200 measurement system was purchased from SEAWARD and used to collect all the readings. The instrument is an I–V curve tracer and can measure open-circuit voltage, short circuit current, current and voltage at maximum power point, ground (earth) continuity, line current, and power (using clamp). The system provides a full factor of the PV module due to its 1 kV insulation resistance test function. Also, it possesses another device, Solar Survey 200R, for capturing and monitoring ambient temperature. An acquisition software such as SolarCerts is installed with it for storing the curves and inputs from the sensors based on solar radiation and temperature. Further specifications of the measuring system are shown in

Table 2. PV200 specifications based on manufacturer’s datasheets.

PV200 Specifications
Weight	1.04 kg/2.3 lb
Dimensions	26.4 × 10.7 × 5.8 cm/10.4 × 4.2 × 2.3″
Open Circuit Voltage Measurement (PV Terminals)
Display Range	0.0 VDC–1000 VDC
Measuring Range	5.0 VDC–1000 VDC
Resolution	0.1 VDC maximum
Accuracy	±(0.5% + 2 digits)
Short Circuit Current Measurement (PV Terminals)
Display Range	0.00 ADC–15.00 ADC
Measuring Range	0.50 ADC–15.00 ADC
Maximum Power	10 kW
Resolution	0.01 ADC maximum
Accuracy	±(1% + 2 digits)

Note: Further details available at: https://www.seaward.com/gb/support/download/300/ (accessed on 26 May 2024).

.

2.3. Measuring Exergy Efficiency of Solar Panel

Exergy is defined as the maximum measure of useful work that a device can provide when it reaches equilibrium under reference conditions. Exergy analysis uses energy and mass conservation standards with the second law to outline the changes in energy in different systems [19]. Exergy loss demonstrates the energy quality degrading in the process and irreversibility as one of the major characteristics. Thermal energy is subjected to dissipation in the environment in the form of thermal heat or loss, which causes exergy destruction. At the same time, electrical energy is used. The exergy efficiency of the solar PV module is the ratio of output exergy to the input exergy of the solar radiation. Input exergy of a solar photovoltaic module only includes the exergy of the solar radiation intensity incident on the module [11,20]. The ultimate exergy balance of PV solar energy via a steady flow during a given time is shown in Equation (6) as follows:

Exergy Input = Exergy Output + Exergy Loss + Irreversibility

(1)

Ex_in = Ex_out + Ex_loss + Ir

(2)

where Ex_in is the input exergy Watt; Ex_out is the output exergy Watt; Ex_loss is the loss exergy Watt; Ir is the irreversibility.

Solar photovoltaic modules absorb solar energy and convert it into thermal and electric energy. After that, thermal energy undergoes different processes and heat transfer processes, i.e., conduction, convection, and radiation. The pace of heat transfer hinges on the PV solar cell’s efficiency. To measure it, the operating temperature of the solar cell is determined (T_PV), which is linked with incident solar radiation and the ambient temperature. Solar radiation received by the PV module is the Input exergy ${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{x}}_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}}$ and is calculated in the given Equation (3) as follows [20,21]:

$${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{x}}_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}}=\mathrm{A}\mathrm{G}\left[1-{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{a}}}{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\left({\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{a}}}{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}}}\right)}^4\right]$$

(3)

where A is the PV module area in m²; G is solar radiation intensity in W/m²; T_a and T_s are the ambient and solar temperatures in K.

The exergy output of solar PV module can be examined as outlet exergy which comprises electric and thermal exergy as follows:

Ex_out = Ex_elect + Ex_therm

(4)

Here, the thermal exergy is measured in Equation (10), and the rate of heat convection transfer is also shown in Equation (6) as follows [22,23]:

$${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{x}}_{\mathrm{t}\mathrm{h}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{m}}=\mathrm{Q}\left[1-{\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{a}}}{{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}}}\right]$$

(5)

where Q represents the heat losses from the PV panel and is estimated by the given equation as follows:

Q = UA (T_PV − T_a)

(6)

Convection and radiation losses contribute the overall heat loss coefficient of a solar photovoltaic module and are given by [24,25] as follows:

U = h_conv + h_rad

(7)

where h_conv is the convective heat loss and ${\mathrm{h}}_{\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}}$ is the radiative heat loss. To obtain the coefficient of convective heat transfer, Equation (8) will be used. Below is Equation (9) for the coefficient radiation heat transfer between the solar module and surroundings, whereas the sky’s effective temperature is given by (10) [21,22] as follows.

h_conv = 2.8 + 3Vw

(8)

$${\mathrm{h}}_{\mathrm{rad}}=\epsilon \sigma \left({\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{sky}}+{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}\right)\left({\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{k}\mathrm{y}}^2+{\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}^2\right)$$

(9)

T_sky = T_a − 6

(10)

The formula for calculating the module temperature via NOCT is as follows in (11):

$${\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{P}\mathrm{V}}={\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{a}}+(\mathrm{N}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{T}-20)\cdot {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{G}}{800}}$$

(11)

Hence, the electrical exergy in the output power of solar photovoltaic module is as follows [18,19]:

$${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{x}}_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{l}}={\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{c}}\times {\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{c}}\times \mathrm{F}\mathrm{F}$$

(12)

2.4. Energy Efficiency of Solar Panel

For an open steady-state system, the exergy balance is determined by the first law of thermodynamics [22]. Energy efficiency provides the ratio between the solar cell output power and solar energy distributed to the PV panels [20]. Solar PV conversion energy efficiency can be calculated as follows:

$${\mathsf{\eta }}_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{y}}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{t}}}{{\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}}}}$$

(13)

In a solar cell, the efficiency of energy conversion linked with the electric circuit is the proportion of the output of electric power to the solar radiation incident at the exterior of the solar cell. A photovoltaic cell’s output power is determined by cell temperature and the amount of solar radiation’s incidence. It can be inferred that the energy efficiency is in direct proportion to solar radiation incidence while having a reverse proportion to the temperature of the cell (Equation (14)) [26].

$${\mathsf{\eta }}_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{y}}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{c}}\times {\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{c}}\times \mathrm{F}\mathrm{F}}{\mathrm{A}\times \mathrm{G}}}$$

(14)

The I–V characteristic of the solar cell is measured by the following Equation (15):

$$\mathrm{I}={\mathrm{I}}_1-{\mathrm{I}}_0\times {\mathrm{e}\mathrm{x}\mathrm{p}}^{\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{q}\times \left(\mathrm{V}-\mathrm{I}{\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{s}}\right)}{\mathrm{K}\times \mathrm{T}}}\right]}$$

(15)

where I is the current, I₁ and I₀ are the light generated current, A and Saturation current density, A/m², q = Charge of the electron C, V = Voltage V, R_s = Series resistance, ohm, K = Boltzmann constant J/K, T = Temperature °C

Equation (4) calculates the output electrical power of a solar photovoltaic module as follows:

P_el = I × V

(16)

where P_el is the Electrical power, I is the current, and V is the voltage.

In addition, the maximum electrical output power is measured by Equation (17) as follows:

P_max = V_OC × I_SC × FF = V_mp × I_mp

(17)

3. Results

The bifacial modules’ performance was assessed on a cloudy day and the study compared it with the monofacial module. Both modules were placed tilted facing south at 26.34°, and their height was one meter directly above the ground. Readings within the periods, Period 1 (11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.) and Period 2 (3 p.m.–4:30 p.m.), were recorded for comparing solar irradiance, PV module temperature, and ambient temperature. Based on these readings, the exergy and energy analyses were performed.

Module temperature (T_PV) is susceptible to fluctuations in both the ambient temperature and solar radiation levels. This study was carried out on a cloudy day, resulting in a nearly constant ambient temperature throughout both periods. Thus, the major factor that affected T_PV was the higher degree of solar irradiance. In the first period, the high irradiance levels were more than 500 W/m², whereas T_pv was 31 °C and 27 °C for the bifacial and monofacial modules, respectively. During Period 2, solar radiation and T_pv dropped to less than 23 °C and 20 °C for both the modules, respectively, but the ambient temperature remained unchanged.

Figure 3 and Figure 4 showed differences in the module temperature (Tpv), ambient temperature, and solar irradiance for both the modules, respectively. The PV cell temperature Tpv is high because the module receives an extra amount of solar irradiance from the back of the module, causing its interior temperature to increase; as mentioned by Meneses Rodriguez et al. [27], the efficiency of the photovoltaic solar cells decreases with an increase in temperature, and cooling is necessary at high illumination conditions.

The exergy analysis for the bifacial and monofacial PV modules are illustrated in Figure 5 and Figure 6. It includes the solar irradiance incident, input exergy, electrical exergy, thermal energy, output exergy, and lost exergy which were obtained from the recorded readings using equations from (1) to (17). Input exergy depends on the solar radiation incidence on the PV module in the given study location. During Period 1, the input exergy of the bifacial PV module was 923 W, with a solar irradiance of 989.3 W/m², while in Period 2, the input exergy was 260 W with a solar irradiance of 279.7 W/m². The input exergy for monofacial was 734.6 W, with a solar irradiance of 685 W/m² in Period 1, while the input exergy was 412.5 W with a solar irradiance of 685 W/m² in Period 2. As per Equation (4), the exergy output is calculated by subtracting the exergy electrical to the exergy thermal. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the exergy output of both the PV modules. The daily available exergy outputs of the bifacial and monofacial PV modules were 230 W and 122 W, respectively, in Period 1, while in Period 2, the output efficiency for the bifacial and monofacial modules were 62 W and 68 W, respectively. In comparison, the exergy output of the monofacial module was higher than the bifacial PV module due to low thermal exergy.

The exergy profiles for both modules have been shown, while

Table 3. Exergy components’ distribution.

Exergy Components (%)		Bifacial (Min–Max)	Monofacial (Min–Max)
Period-1	Reflected Exergy	7	7
	Input Exergy	93	93
	Output Exergy	19–35	16–26
	Lost Exergy	58–74	67–77
Period-2	Reflected Exergy	7	7
	Input Exergy	93	93
	Output Exergy	22–24	17–19
	Lost Exergy	69–71	74–76

displays the division of exergy components, showing a 93% availability of the incident solar energy in the form of input exergy, along with 7% lost energy due to no absorption or reflection. The exergy that remained could be utilized as output exergy. The results showed that the bifacial module had a better performance in comparison with the monofacial module based on electrical energy and output exergy. Its efficiency values are given in

Table 4. Extreme values of exergy in bifacial and monofacial module profiles.

		Bifacial		Monofacial
	Output	Ex (Min–Max)	Elect (Min–Max)	Ex (Min–Max)	Elect (Min–Max)
Period #1	Wh/m2	101–230	91–220	86.3–141	82.4–136.7
	Eff, %	20–37.2	16.8–32.5	17.1–27.7	15.3–25.3
Period #2	Wh/m2	35.5–62.9	34.6–61.6	24.9–68.3	24.4–67.8
	Eff, %	23.4–25.3	21.3–22.9	17.5–20.8	16.3–19.3

, reflecting both modules. It also showed both the minimum and maximum values, demonstrating the electrical energy and out-exergy values of the modules, recorded in the same periods. Table 4 shows the energy efficiency of both modules during both periods.

The variations in the energy and exergy efficiencies are exhibited in Figure 7 for the bifacial and monofacial modules. Figure 7 demonstrates the efficiency variation between the bifacial module over the monofacial module during both periods. The bifacial module achieved a 9.5% exergy efficiency with a 7% increase in energy efficiency during Period 1, while in Period 2, the bifacial module displayed a 5.5% improvement in exergy efficiency and a 3.5% improvement in energy efficiency. In the monofacial module, the exergy efficiency was 6.5% with a 5% increase in energy efficiency in Period 1, while in Period 2, the exergy efficiency had a 3.5% improvement in exergy efficiency and a 2.5% improvement in energy efficiency. It is noteworthy that the moments with increased exergy efficiency corresponded to periods of higher module temperature, as illustrated by comparing Figure 2 and Figure 3. Further, the bifacial module showed high exergy and energy efficiency because it received an extra amount of solar irradiance from its rear side, causing its interior temperature to increase, which consequently made the system more sustainable as compared to the monofacial module.

The variations in the I–V and P–V curves of the bifacial and monofacial modules were assessed over two different periods using the PV200 instrument. During Period 1, the bifacial module had a short-circuit current (I_sc) of 7.8 A and 48 V was its open circuit voltage (V_oc), whereas the monofacial module had an I_sc of 6 A and V_oc of 47 V (Figure 8). During Period 2, a drop to 3 A with a V_oc of 47 V was observed in the bifacial model, while a drop to 1.5 A with a V_oc of 45 V was observed in the monofacial module (Figure 9). Concerning the P–V curves, during Period 1, the maximum power output of 140 W/m² was achieved by the bifacial module, while the monofacial module achieved 120 W/m² (Figure 10). During Period 2, there was a drop to 54 W/m² and 28 W/m² in the bifacial and monofacial modules, respectively (Figure 11). On account of the differences in solar irradiance, multiple I–V and P–V curves were obtained.

The variation in the Fill Factor during the cloudy day is shown in Figure 12, representing both modules. A high FF value of 80% for both modules was achieved, revealing the optimal efficiency of the modules during the energy conversion process on a cloudy day.

The bifacial module exhibited superior electrical performance relative to the monofacial module under both high and low irradiance conditions on a cloudy day. This superiority is characterized by the higher short-circuit current, open-circuit voltage, and maximum power output values. These results highlight the potential benefits of bifacial technology in real-world settings where inconsistent irradiance is common.

Various researchers, including Mahmood et al. [28], have investigated the tested photovoltaic systems and examined the impact of cool roof coatings on both monofacial and bifacial modules. The experiment’s findings demonstrate that, with an average reflection (albedo) of 0.63 for the roof coating, the bifacial PV module’s peak power efficiency rose by 3.29% and reached 18.1%. The monofacial PV module performed better by 0.24% because the cool roof covering reduced the temperature by 1.3 °C. Yakubu et al. [29] looked into the potential energy output of a monofacial and bifacial photovoltaic standalone system at low latitudes. The model considered key system parameters including albedo, module height, and module self-shading. The model was validated using PVsyst and in-plane field irradiance data that were obtained in Navrongo, Ghana, between November 2020 and June 2021. The technical examination of a bifacial PV module under those climate conditions revealed an average bifacial gain of 5.65% to 10.15% when compared to a monofacial system [29].

4. Conclusions

This study investigated the exergy and energy efficiencies of bifacial solar modules on a cloudy day by comparing their performance to monofacial modules. The research analyzed various parameters, including solar irradiance, ambient and module temperature, and key electrical characteristics like open-circuit voltage (V_oc), short-circuit current (I_sc), and maximum power output (P_m). The experiment’s findings indicate that the bifacial module outperformed the monofacial module in both electrical energy and output exergy. Bifacial modules achieved a 9.5% exergy efficiency with a 7% increase in energy efficiency during Period 1, while in Period 2, the bifacial modules displayed a 5.5% improvement in exergy efficiency and a 3.5% improvement in energy efficiency. In the monofacial modules, the exergy efficiency was 6.5% with a 5% increase in energy efficiency in Period 1, while in Period 2, there was a 3.5% improvement in exergy efficiency and a 2.5% improvement in energy efficiency. The bifacial module showed high exergy and energy efficiencies because it received an extra amount of solar irradiance from its rear side, causing its interior temperature to increase, which consequently made the system more sustainable as compared to the monofacial module. These findings provide valuable insights for researchers, developers, environmentalists, and policymakers working to advance renewable energy technologies and promote sustainable energy solutions. Future research could explore the potential of bifacial technology for enhancing sustainability, such as investigating the impact of different albedo conditions, optimizing module placement and tracking systems, and assessing the long-term performance and economic viability of bifacial systems.