WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New Thin Film … · WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New...

WHITE PAPER

CIGS Technology – The New Thin Film Engine?EuPD White Paper Series 02/2010 | September 2010

EuPD Research is a B2B market researcher for public and private companies and the media.

As an international service provider, EuPD Research offers a wide range of qualitative and

quantitative research services based on many years of experience, particularly on global PV

markets.

EuPD Research publishes market studies, industry analyses and business indices to support

companies in making strategic decisions – both long and short term.In the International Solar

department, EuPD Research tracks current developments on energy markets worldwide to

deliver up-to-date, accurate information for market players.

With a dedicated, experienced team working under the leadership of Markus A.W. Hoehner,

EuPD Research strives to bring you the information your company needs for success.

© EuPD Research | September 2010 3

EuPD Research

AGENDA

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 6Will CIGS Lead Thin Film Out of the Crisis? ..................................................................................... 6

CIGS technology and its potential ................................................................................................. 8Heterogeneous Technology - Heterogeneous Manufacturers ............................................................ 8Highest Efficiency ......................................................................................................................... 10Low Production Costs ................................................................................................................... 11Design and Flexibility .................................................................................................................... 12Potential and Reality – Types of Application in Practice .................................................................. 13

CIGS – Opportunities and Limits of a Versatile Technology ......................................................... 14Private Rooftop Segment ............................................................................................................. 14Commercial Rooftop Segment ...................................................................................................... 18Open Space Segment ................................................................................................................... 20Building Integrated PV – Classification and Potential ..................................................................... 25

Outlook ....................................................................................................................................... 30

Imprint ........................................................................................................................................ 31

© EuPD Research | May 20104

Will CIGS lead Thin Film out of the crisis In the last years the solar thin film industry has been characterized by dynamic growth. As an attractive low-

cost alternative to traditional crystalline “thick-film” photovoltaics, thin film companies were able to extend

their market share to 20 percent. However, this boom seems to be in danger.

Drastically falling prices for mono- and poly-crystalline modules are reducing the cost advantage of thin film

and are putting the industry under severe pressure. This has already left scars. Some producers have filed for

bankruptcy while others have returned to traditional crystalline technologies. Simultaneously, negative head-

lines are complicating the already difficult access to expansion financing.

These developments have contributed to the uncertainty of the sequel of the thin film story. Will it come to

a sudden end or be countered by a successful follow-up strategy? Many experts are placing their bets on the

latter, banking on CIGS technology, which until now has been shadowed by competing thin film technologies

CdTe, a-Si and µc-Si.

What is behind this positive appraisal of CIGS? Is it justified considering its modest success so far? The goal of

this whitepaper is to answer these questions and shed some light on the future of thin film.

Introduction


Figure 1: Market development of different PV technologies (shipments in MWp)

Source: EuPD Research 2010

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

CIGS a-Si CdTe c-Si

MWp

387 MWp

790 MWp

1,238 MWp

9,228 MWp

?0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

CIGS a-Si CdTe c-Si

MWp

387 MWp

790 MWp

1,238 MWp

9,228 MWp

?

Introduction

7© EuPD Research | September 2010

Heterogeneous Technology – Heterogeneous Manufacturers Although some manufacturers refer to the technology as CIS or CIGSSe, CIGS is now the term most com-

monly used. The various ways of writing this are based on the different types of semi-conductors found in the

absorber layer. While all producers use copper (Cu) and indium (In), some produce without gallium (Ga) or

use selenium (Se) instead of sulphur (S).

The multitude of manufacturing processes and terminology indicates a heterogeneous manufacturing lands-

cape. Currently, the CIGS technology family is made up of approximately 40 manufactures. However, they all

find themselves at fundamentally different stages of development. To date, very few producers have actually

managed to go into mass production. Many are still rooted in the R&D phase or are in the process of laun-

ching pilot projects. Tried and tested modules can only be acquired from the established players of this tech-

nology which include Solar Frontier (Showa Shell), Würth Solar or Avancis. Despite high market entry barriers,

these long established companies have recently been joined by an array of venture capital financed CIGS

start-ups from the USA as well as China and Taiwan with the aim of advancing the technology to marketabi-

lity. A number of manufacturers are building on flexible substrates which show great potential particularly in

the fields of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) as well as in portable applications.

CIGS technology and its potential


Figure 2: Overview of CIGS manufacturers


Stage of development in terms of output 2009 (MWp)R&D-PhaseMass-

production

Yea

r of

fou

ndat

ion

2009

1980

USA

Europe

Rest of Asia

Japan

flexible CIGS

Cd-free production

Ascent Solar

AVANCIS

CIS Solartechnik

Daiyang Metal

Flisom AG

GSE

HelioVolt

ISET Inc.

Jenn Feng

Miasolé

Nanosolar

Nesi Solar

Odersun

PVNext

Shurjo Energy

Solarion

Stion

Sulfurcell

Sunshine PV TYONS

Würth Solar

XsunX

AQT

AxunTek Solar

China Nuvo

CIS Solar

DayStar Techn.

Honda Soltec

Illies Renewable

Johanna Solar

PVflex Solar

Solibro

Solar Frontier

SoloPower

Solyndra

Sunvim Solar

Telio Solar

Nexcis

Stage of development in terms of output 2009 (MWp)R&D-PhaseMass-

production

Yea

r of

fou

ndat

ion

2009

1980

USA

Europe

Rest of Asia

Japan

flexible CIGS

Cd-free production

Ascent Solar

AVANCIS

CIS Solartechnik

Daiyang Metal

Flisom AG

GSE

HelioVolt

ISET Inc.

Jenn Feng

Miasolé

Nanosolar

Nesi Solar

Odersun

PVNext

Shurjo Energy

Solarion

Stion

Sulfurcell

Sunshine PV TYONS

Würth Solar

XsunX

AQT

AxunTek Solar

China Nuvo

CIS Solar

DayStar Techn.

Honda Soltec

Illies Renewable

Johanna Solar

PVflex Solar

Solibro

Solar Frontier

SoloPower

Solyndra

Sunvim Solar

Telio Solar

Nexcis

Against the backdrop of the widely discussed, and partly implemented, ban on PV modules that contain

cadmium, First Solar and CdTe tend to be mentioned most, although it also affects the majority of CIGS ma-

nufacturers. Several manufacturers are currently using the poisonous heavy metal cadmium in the buffer layer

of CIGS cells. However, in an attempt to pre-empt any regulations that would hinder entry to new markets,

some producers have already successfully replaced cadmium.



Highest Efficiency As CIGS is a technology of great efficiency, many experts see it ahead of the rest in the current technology

race. It has already shown that it can achieve higher rates of efficiency than competing thin-film technologies.

Whereas CIGS modules attain levels of 12-13%, CdTe reaches 11% and microcrystalline 9-10%. Amorphous

silicon modules only manage approximately 7%.

The differences are even greater when the potential for efficiency is taken into consideration. In order to

assess this potential, record cells are most effective regarding the long term perspective while the possible

production level is best suited for a mid term estimation. The latest results from the German ZSW show a

peak value of 20.3 percent on cell level which means that CIGS technology is, in the long term, even ahead

of polycrystalline technology. Several experts also see CIGS in a promising position in the short to mid term.

Indeed, compared to the current efficiency level, an improvement of up to five percentage point seems pos-

sible. An increase to this extent can not be attributed to any other technology at this moment in time.

Figure 3: Efficiency according to technology


Mitsubishi Electric, 2010

SunPower, 2010

ZSW, 2010

NREL, 2001Uni-Solar, 2010

Oerlikon, 2009

5

10

15

20

25

30

c-Si mono c-Si poly CIGS CdTe a-Si multi junction a-Si single junction

Technology record Potential production level Record panel Average panel

Efficiency in %

Mitsubishi Electric, 2010

SunPower, 2010

ZSW, 2010

NREL, 2001Uni-Solar, 2010

Oerlikon, 2009

5

10

15

20

25

30

c-Si mono c-Si poly CIGS CdTe a-Si multi junction a-Si single junction

Technology record Potential production level Record panel Average panel

Efficiency in %




Low Production Costs The fact that although CIGS technology has a high efficiency level but not widely used can be traced back to

its comparably high production costs, which are mainly rooted in very complex production processes, a low

degree of standardization of the production equipment and comparably low capacities on part of the manuf-

acturers. While according to company statements, First Solar was able to produce CdTe modules at a price of

0.68€/Wp as early as 2009, the largest CIGS producers were incurring production costs of about 1.25 €/Wp.

Recent statements from CIGS manufacturers regarding possible production costs of about one Euro per Wp

change this proportion in value but certainly not in its tendency.

Production costs of 1.25 €/Wp, at First Solar, go as far back as 2005. A total of 25 MWP was produced at

that time, a volume similar to that now being produced by major CIGS manufacturers. As a result of a sub-

stantial ramp up in production capacity, First Solar was able to cut costs by about 55% over four years to

which the learning curve effects made a significant contribution.

Now, some time after CdTe and First solar, established CIGS producers, in particular, are entering the ramp

up phase – a clear sign that the production process is under control. Apart from the announcement by Solar

Frontier that they intend to ramp up their capacities to one gigawatt by 2012, Avancis is also set to expand

their capacities up to 120 MW. In order to meet the increasing demand of CIGS modules, Würth Solar en-

tered a strategic alliance with Manz Automation giving Manz the right to exclusively use and market Würth

Solar’s production technology by means of what is known as a CIGSfab.

Beside the manufacturer’s ramp up, such intensified commitment of equipment suppliers marks another

important milestone on the way towards costs competitiveness of the CIGS technology. This is the only way

to advance necessary standardizations in order to amplify the generation of economies of scale and learning

curve effects in production.

The impact the expansion of production capacity can have on the further reduction of costs can be seen in

figure 4. It shows that the production of CIGS modules at a competitive price could be possible even from

a conservatively estimated learning curve. Prerequisite is, however, a rapid ramp up in order to make up for

time lost.


Figure 4: Experience curves for CdTe and CIGS


0

0.5 €/Wp

1.0 €/Wp

1.5 €/Wp

2.0 €/Wp

2.5 €/Wp

3.0 €/Wp

3.5 €/Wp

1 MWp 10 MWp 100 MWp 1,000 MWp 10,000 MWp

Learning rate 20% First Solar CIGS

1.24* 1.09*0.96*

0.84*0.68*

0.59*

2.29*

1.25

$ -€ rate = 0,78 * According to company statements

Learning rate 15%

0

0.5 €/Wp

1.0 €/Wp

1.5 €/Wp

2.0 €/Wp

2.5 €/Wp

3.0 €/Wp

3.5 €/Wp

1 MWp 10 MWp 100 MWp 1,000 MWp 10,000 MWp

Learning rate 20% First Solar CIGS

1.24* 1.09*0.96*

0.84*0.68*

0.59*

2.29*

1.25

$ -€ rate = 0,78 * According to company statements

Learning rate 15%

Design und Flexibility CIGS modules normally have a dark black surface with a pinstripe design and come either with or without

frames. It is possible to order them in a variety of styles and designs, ranging from different colors to semi-

transparent modules but only on condition that a reduction in efficiency is accepted. However, the black

module has proven to be most popular even from an aesthetic point of view. In fact, the suitability of CIGS

modules for Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) is often emphasized thanks to its attractive design. In

addition to the aforementioned aspects, CIGS technology also responds better to low light conditions than

crystalline modules, as the solar radiation for building integrated PV systems is not always optimal.




Flexible PV modules can already be used innovatively in BIPV as well as on less-stable rooftops or small porta-

ble applications. Although this segment has mainly been influenced by flexible amorphous silicon modules, it

appears that CIGS technology is set to make an inroad. Indeed, almost a dozen CIGS manufacturers are al-

ready in the process of developing CIGS cells. Furthermore, the certification of the flexible modules produced

by Solarion and Global Solar Energy in accordance with IEC 61646 is proof that any issues regarding weather

proof encapsulation in the long term have been overcome.

Potential and Reality – Possible Applications for CIGS in Practice

The features of photovoltaic technology with respect to efficiency, production costs, materials used, substra-

tes as well as appearance greatly determine the potential of a technology and particularly its suitability for the

different photovoltaic applications.

On taking a closer look at the characteristics of CIGS technology, its great potential in terms of efficiency,

potentially non-toxic materials, flexible choice of substrates and appealing appearance come to light. Thus,

the technology is generally a suitable alternative to any relevant type of application: private (small) as well

as commercial (large) rooftop segments, open space as well as BIPV. Needless to say, the diverse possibilities

of use lead to the conclusion that CIGS technology has enormous market potential. Should it realize even

a fraction of its potential, CIGS could move from its niche and become a driving force in the future positive

development of thin film technology.

However, the aim of this paper is not only to show the potential of CIGS technology. Rather it is to work out

and define criterion which will enable the realization of this potential based on the assumption that there is a

discrepancy between potential and market volume.

With this in mind, the following simulations were carried out in order to compare the various applications.

The results shall indicate specific target values which CIGS has to fulfill to facilitate competitiveness in terms

of costs and efficiency level. As the specificity of BIPV applications makes this quite difficult, the general po-

tential of building integrated PV shall be subject to examination.


The Private Rooftop Segment – Efficiency’s impact All rooftop systems share a common trait; there is only a limited amount of space available for the PV system.

This is predominantly true for small rooftop systems. Efficiency, therefore, plays a particularly important role

here as maximum power output has to be achieved on limited space. The rate of efficiency is an indication of

how much irradiation the module actually converts into usable energy.

The impact which the rate of efficiency can have is made even clearer by the following comparison. Where

highly efficient monocrystalline modules can generate up to 195 watt of electricity per square meter under

standard test conditions (STC), a-Si modules sometimes generate only 63 watt. If a rooftop of 30 square me-

ters is assumed, the difference would amount to almost 4kWp.

The lower rate of efficiency is often one of the main reasons why crystalline modules are frequently installed

in rooftop systems up to 10kWp in size. Over 21,000 PV systems in this category with a total installed capaci-

ty of 473 MWp were installed in Germany in 2009. However, only a fraction of the aforementioned consisted

of thin film technology. The latest findings from the EuPD SalesMonitor paint an even clearer picture. This

index of offers which was set up in cooperation with the online platform, Photovoltaic Forum, shows that of

the 1,080 offers registered for PV systems up to 10kWp, only 17 were for thin film modules.

It is also worth noting that 16 of these17 offers addressed CIGS modules. There are a multitude of reasons

for this. On the one hand CIGS technology has, as previously mentioned, an advantage in terms of efficiency

within the thin film technology and benefits from its advantageous appearance. On the other hand, First So-

lar, the most relevant thin film supplier, has focused so far on other market segments.

In order to somewhat escape the race on the degree of efficiency, some thin film providers have already posi-

tioned themselves in niches which could become more attractive as market saturation increases. This includes

badly positioned or shadowed rooftops where thin film, owing to its low light behavior, can perform much

better than crystalline modules.

CIGS – Opportunities and Limits of a Versatile Technology


CIGS on Private Rooftops? – A Comparison of Simulations

Although currently not of great relevance, efficiency, performance and design do not generally seem to speak

against the use of CIGS modules in private rooftops. What has to be achieved in order to position CIGS as a

veritable alternative to and competitor of crystalline? The following simulation which compares two alternate

systems on a fictitious rooftop should offer a solution. The system and data used are based on the simulation

tool „PVsyst 5.20“which was developed by the University of Geneva. The underlying system configuration as

well as the main assumptions can be found in the following graph.

Figure 5: Assumptions and system configurations in the private rooftop segment

Location factors

LocationHorizontal global irradiation in kWh/m²Collector plane orientationEffective irriadance on collectors in kWh/m²ShadingsRoof area in m²

Würzburg, Germany1,09130°1,173no shadings30

System factors CIS / CIGS mono

Module ManufacturerModule ModelUnit Nom. Power in WpEfficiency in %Total number of PV modulesModule area m²System performance in kWp (STC)Energy Yield in kWh/kWp/yearPerformance Ratio in %Produced energy in kWh/year (simulation)

Inverter ManufacturerInverter ModelOperating VoltageTotal number of invertersUnit Nom. PowerInverter loss during operation in %

Würth SolarWSG 0036 E0808011.04029.23.21,03185.03,278

MastervoltSunmaster XS 4300230-440 V1 Unit3.30 kW AC5.7

SunPowerSPR-425E-WHT-D42519.71225.95.199682.25,081

FroniusIG 5100150-450 V1 Unit5.10 kW AC5.7

Investment conditions CIS / CIGS mono

Average feed-in remuneration in €/kWhSystem price in € per kWpTotal investment volume in €Equity share in %Insurance costs in € p.a.OPEX in € p. a. (incl.insurance)OPEX in % of total investment Annual growth rate of OPEX in %Date of granting of creditDate of commissioningInterest rate in %Disaggio in %Credit period in yearsInterest and debt payments

0.34053,57711,446.002557.23144.601.261.501.07.201001.08.20105.04.015annual

0.34053,42617,472.602587.36174.731.001.501.07.201001.08.20105.04.015annual


No Surprises in the First Instance

As graph 6 demonstrates, returns are almost identical when identical kWp prices are assumed. However, rea-

listic system prices are required in order to comment on the actual cost effectiveness of both systems. Based

on 55 offers, the EuPD SalesMonitor shows, for SunPower, an average price of 3,426 € per kWp for an ave-

rage system size of 9.5 kWp. From a total of 21 offers for CIGS modules, a price of 3,577 kWp was calcula-

ted for mid size systems of approximately 8.7 kWp.

Figure 6: IRR comparison in the private rooftop segment


5.01%3.83%

3,426 3,577mono CIGS

0.0%

10.0%

15.0%

2,700 2,750 2,800 2,850 2,900 2,950 3,000 3,050 3,100 3,150 3,200 3,250 3,300 3,350 3,400 3,450 3,500 3,550 3,600 3,650

Effic

ienc

y in

%

System price in €/kWp

5.01%3.83%

3,426 3,577mono CIGS

0.0%

10.0%

15.0%

2,700 2,750 2,800 2,850 2,900 2,950 3,000 3,050 3,100 3,150 3,200 3,250 3,300 3,350 3,400 3,450 3,500 3,550 3,600 3,650

Effic

ienc

y in

%


A comparison of returns based on the internal rate of return (IRR) shows that monocrystalline modules are,

under these assumptions, more lucrative. A result that was of no surprise, in fact it was to be expected due to

the significance of the rate of efficiency.

CIGS – Opportunities and Limits



But the Sensitivity Analysis Shows That CIGS Can be Competitive

With regard to the objectives set in this paper, the question concerning from what price or degree of efficien-

cy a CIGS system can be deemed economically competitive now has to be addressed. The sensitivity analysis

carried out on this issue has come to astounding results. A consistent degree of efficiency of 11 % along with

a system price of 3,435€ per kWp would suffice to guarantee an internal interest rate of 5.01%. If the price

was assumed to be fixed and the required degree of efficiency calculated in order to ascertain an indiffe-

rence between both alternatives, then a result of 11.43% is reached. Both price level as well as degree of

efficiency can be realized with current CIGS systems.

The aforementioned sensitivity analysis is, of course, only a projection and does not consider any future cost

reductions or increases in efficiency on the part of monocrystalline modules. There are, however, two main

reasons which suggest that the future development of CIGS in terms of price level and degree of efficiency

will, at least, be in line with that of monocrystalline technology. The first of which is the fact that, compared

to other technologies, CIGS has the greatest potential in terms of increased efficiency. Secondly, with respect

to mass production, CIGS technology is still in its infancy which is why learning curve effects in production are

comparably large and can be swiftly realized.


ICommercial Rooftops – Between Rate of Return and Efficiency System sizes in the commercial segment span a wide range from approximately 20 kWp up to sizes in me-

gawatt. In addition to warehouses and factories, agriculturally used buildings, in particular in Germany, have

played an important role. According to estimations from EuPD Research, commercial rooftops contributed

to almost 60 % of the German market in 2009 with over 2.2 GW of installed capacity. Commercial rooftop

systems are also key market drivers in other countries. They make up 40 to 50 percent of the market in Italy,

the USA and Belgium, and about a third of the French market.

Thus far, both thin film and traditional crystalline modules have been used on commercially used rooftops.

This can be attributed not only to the greater availability of space but also to the greater emphasis many

operators place on the rate of return. Several polycrystalline producers, particularly from Asia have recently

started to offer products with an adequate degree of efficiency at a lower price, thus providing them a strong

competitive position in the commercial rooftop segment. The largest rooftop system to date equipped with

CIGS modules and a capacity of 820 kWp was installed in Italy in 2010.

CIGS in the Commercial Rooftop Segment?

The simulation comparison of the commercial rooftop segment was carried out using three different systems;

CIS modules from Solibro, polycrystalline modules from Trina Solar and monocrystalline modules from Sun-

Power. The fictitious rooftop space was limited to 2,000 square meters and is located in sunny Mannheim,

Germany. The data used for both the system and returns is based on „PVsyst 5.20“.



Figure 7: Assumptions and system configurations in the commercial rooftop segment

Location factors

Location

Horizontal global irradiation in kWh/m²

Collector plane orientation

Effective irriadance on collectors in kWh/m²

Shadings

Roof area in m²

Mannheim, Germany

1,046

30°

1,113

no shadings

2,000

System factors CIS / CIGS poly mono



SolibroSL2-10510511.22,1241,99722397984.7218

SanternoSUNWAY TG 290 - 600V - MT315-630 V1 Unit220 kW AC2.8

Trina SolarTSM-230 P0521014.11,2161,99028092780.5259


SunPowerSPR-280/B-WHT-I28017.21,2241,99634393080,8319


Investment conditions CIS / CIGS poly mono


0.31673,163689,534.00253,447.678,654.411.241.501.01.201001.08.20105.04.015annual

0.31512,530708,400.00253,542.008,748.741.241.501.01.201001.08.20105.04.015annual

0.31353,0361,041,348.00255,206.7410,413.481.001.501.01.201001.08.20105.04.015annual



Despite the Current Price Advantage for Polycrystalline Modules From the Far East There Are Major

Opportunities for CIGS

Based on a total of 17 offers, the EuPD SalesMonitor shows an average system price of 2,530 € per kWp for

larger rooftop systems with modules from branded manufacturers sited in the Far East. Small rooftop systems

up to 10 kWp in size averaged, from 130 offers, a price of 2,852 € per kWp. If each price difference, in per-

cent, for the segment up to 10 kWp (see simulation for private rooftop) is applied to the segment for larger

rooftop systems, the results are as follows: highly efficient monocrystalline modules (SunPower) 3,036 € per

kWp (+20%) and 3,163 €/kWp for systems with CIGS modules (+25%).

A profitability analysis, based on these system prices, shows that economically motivated decisions would

favor polycrystalline technology.

Figure 8: Return comparison in the commercial rooftop segment

System price per kWp IRR (Internal Rate of Return) Net present value

polycrystalline (Trina Solar)monocrystalline (SunPower)CIS/CIGS (Solibro)

2,530.00 € 3,036.00 € 3,163.00 €

9.03%4.30%4.04%

176,841.00 € 41,413.00 € 21,481.00 €

What requirements need to be met so that CIGS technology can compete with polycrystalline modules from

the Far East? This question is examined in the following illustration. At a constant efficiency of 11% the sy-

stem price should not exceed 2,683 € per kWp whereby a consistent system price of 3,163 €/kWp needs a

rate of efficiency of 13.25% to be able to compete with polycrystalline system. The prospects of meeting

these demands are fair. Modules produced by Würth Solar, for example, have already achieved an average

aperture efficiency of 12.8 % - and further improvements have been announced for summer 2010.



Figure 9: Sensitivity analysis with respect to efficiency and system price


3,1634,000 3,500 2,5002,6913,000

11,0%

12,74%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

11.00%

12.74%

3,1634,000 3,500 2,5002,6913,000

11,0%

12,74%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

11.00%

12.74%



The Open Space Segment – Impact of Rate of Return

The availability of space for large solar parks on land previously used for military or industrial purposes or in

desert areas plays a lesser role than for rooftop systems. The minimization of the levelized cost of electricity

(LCOE) is the crucial point here. The cheaper it is to produce a kilowatt of electricity, the higher the return for

those investors who have, in most cases, financially supported the undertaking. It is therefore of no surprise

that several projects have exercised a preference for modules produced either by the cost leader First Solar or

cheaper crystalline modules from Asian producers.

CIGS has only played a minor role so far. Plants such as the 3.26 MWp solar park constructed by Würth Soler-

gy in 2008, in Spain, remain an exception. Similar to previous processes, the following analysis calculates the

threshold values with regard to price and rate of efficiency from which CIGS systems can successfully compe-

te with the open space segment.

Is CIGS an Alternative to First Solar?

On completion of a number of comparisons with crystalline systems, it can be clearly seen that CdTe modules

produced by First Solar set the benchmark. The data from „PVsyst 5.20“ was used once again, this time for a

system 5 MWp in size in the Freiburg region in Germany.



Figure 10: Assumptions and system configurations in the open space segment

Location factors

LocationHorizontal global irradiation in kWh/m²Collector plane orientationEffective irriadance on collectors in kWh/m²ShadingsRoof area in m²

Freiburg, Germany1,11430°1,201no shadingsno limit

System factors CIS / CIGS CdTe



Würth SolarWSG 0036 E0808011.062,50045,5645,0001,08887.65,442

SMASunny Central 1250MV-11500-820 V4 Units5,000 kW AC2.8

First SolarFS-27777.510.964,51246,4495,0001,04283.95,209

SMASunny Central 1250MV-11500-820 V4 Units5,000 kW AC2.8

Investment conditions CIS / CIGS CdTe


0.2502 (no conversion area)3,000.0015,000,000.002575,000.00130,000.000.871.501.01.201001.08.20105.04.015annual

0.2502 (no conversion area)2,000.0011,000,000.002555,000.00110,000.001.001.501.01.201001.08.20105.04.015annual



CdTe Lies Ahead in the Open Space Segment – But for How Long?

A comparison of the net present value of both investment alternatives where prices are the same reveals an

advantage for CIGS technology. This can be ascribed to the better efficiency rate of Würth Solar modules

which is 3.7 percentage points higher and lies at 87.6%, thus generating 46 kilowatt hours more per kilo-

watt peak.

Figure 11: Return comparison in the open space segment


-6.0 m €-5.0 m €-4.0 m €-3.0 m €-2.0 m €-1.0 m €0.0 m €1.0 m €2.0 m €3.0 m €4.0 m €

2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000 3,100 3,200 3,300 3,400 3,500

CdTe CIGS

CdTe = 0.99 m €CIGS = -2.21 m €

Net present value

Interest rate = 8.0%


-6.0 m €-5.0 m €-4.0 m €-3.0 m €-2.0 m €-1.0 m €0.0 m €1.0 m €2.0 m €3.0 m €4.0 m €

2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,900 3,000 3,100 3,200 3,300 3,400 3,500

CdTe CIGS

CdTe = 0.99 m €CIGS = -2.21 m €

Net present value

Interest rate = 8.0%


However, when more realistic pricing scenarios are examined, the advantageous position of CdTe systems

becomes more obvious. Under the assumption that the system price per kilowatt peak for First Solar modules

is 2.200 €, and 3.000 € for Würth Solar CIGS modules, a calculation with an interest rate of 8% results in a

net present value of 0.99 million Euro for CdTe modules and -2.21 million Euro for CIGS.



Competitiveness of CIGS in the Open Space Segment – Ambitious but Possible

Costs to the amount of 672€ per kWp would still have to be saved for the above mentioned modules with an

efficiency rate of 11% in spite of their advantageous performance ratio. Should prices remain at 3,000€ per

kWp, this would entail a necessary increase in efficiency of more than 23% to a level of 13.5%. Conversely,

an increased efficiency rate of one percentage point has, on a system level, a value of approximately 269 €

per kWp.

These are the levers that manufacturers have to use. However, although everybody is striving for, it is unlikely

that the majority of the producers are able to fulfill these criteria in near future. But, the general proof of con-

cept has been delivered by CIGS technology leaders which, with reference to the announcements of an effici-

ency level of 13 to 14 percent in mass production, find themselves more and more on equal footing.

Figure 12: Sensitivity analysis for the open space segment


1% = 269 €/kWp

3,500 3,000 2,500 2,0002,328

11.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Effic

ienc

yin

%


13.5%

1% = 269 €/kWp

3,500 3,000 2,500 2,0002,328

11.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Effic

ienc

yin

%


13.5%



Performance Ratios in Other Regions and Climate Zones

All three simulation comparisons are based on one location in Germany, a choice which can be justified by

the major role currently played by the German market in the global PV industry. However, it is to be assumed

that the relative importance of Germany as a PV market will decline.

Thus the question of whether these results can also be transferred to other regions in the world with similar

climatic conditions is raised. Here, the central factors are the temperature coefficients as well as the low light

behavior which are both reflected in the performance ratio of the PV modules. In order to investigate this

possibility, further simulations were carried out on the fictitious 5MW CIGS open space system in various lo-

cations around the world.

Figure 13: CIGS performance ratio in different climate zones


Bangkok

Freiburg

Perth

Los Angeles

Kairo

Lima

Bangkok

Freiburg

Perth

Los Angeles

Kairo

Lima

Bangkok

Freiburg

Perth

Los Angeles

Kairo

Lima


Horizontal global irradiation: 1,924 kWh/m²

Ø Ambient temperature: 17.79 ºC

Performance Ratio: 86.7 %

















Indeed, the result indicated the highest performance ratio for Freiburg. Nevertheless, the other findings were

also comparatively high. The lowest value of 84.5% was given for Peru. However, this result is still higher

than that achieved by a CdTe system (84.0%) at this location. Consequently, it can be stated that the CIGS

technology is able to achieve a high energy yield under various climatic conditions, what makes it a suitable

technology for the deployment in future PV markets.



What is BIPV? What is its market potential?

BIPV stands for building integrated photovoltaic. It substitutes building components with PV systems. Gene-

rally speaking, a distinction is made between its use on rooftops, the facade, and other parts of the building.

Thus far BIPV is still a niche market. The year 2009 saw installations totaling 250 MW in the US, Germany, Ita-

ly, France and Spain. This corresponds to a share of less than 5% of their total volume. It is to be noted that

BIPV market share varies greatly according to the regulatory framework conditions of each national market.

Whilst BIPV made up less than one percent of the total German market in 2009, it constituted more than half

of all PV systems in France.

Projections for the future expect the share of BIPV to increase as a result of falling costs and a closer coopera-

tion with the construction industry. This is predominantly predicted for more mature markets with a substan-

tial share of rooftops. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the BIPV markets likely to play a vital role in the

future are those which are largest at the moment.



Figure 14: Largest BIPV markets of the future


34.5

24.1

5.7

5.7

4.6

3.4

3.4

13.8

4.6

54.0

55.2

39.1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

France

Germany

Italy

USA

Spain

China

Japan

Switzerland

UAE

Netherlands

Scandinavia

n. a.

Multiple answers possible n = 87

Which country markets will be the largest for BIPV installationsWhich country markets will be the largest for BIPV installations in the future? in the future?

34.5

24.1

5.7

5.7

4.6

3.4

3.4

13.8

4.6

54.0

55.2

39.1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

France

Germany

Italy

USA

Spain

China

Japan

Switzerland

UAE

Netherlands

Scandinavia

n. a.

Multiple answers possible n = 87

Which country markets will be the largest for BIPV installationsWhich country markets will be the largest for BIPV installations in the future? in the future?

Apart from CdTe, all technologies commercially available at this moment in time can be found in the BIPV

segment. Nonetheless, it is to be assumed that, as a result of the wide distribution of in-roof solutions in key

BIPV markets such as France or Italy, as well as the still dominating market position of UNI-Solar in flexible

laminates, crystalline and amorphous silicon modules make up the greatest share of installed capacity to date.

The amount of companies currently active in the field of BIPV leads to the conclusion that this will change in

the future particularly with respect to flexible substrates. Suppliers of CIGS solutions are also making progress

here, similar to that in the field of non-transparent façade solutions. Their greatest advantage over the alrea-

dy established a-Si suppliers is, as previously shown, their rates of efficiency. In contrast to crystalline system

solutions in the roof and facade sector, CIGS primarily benefits from the better temperature coefficients and

low light performance.



Figure 15: BIPV suppliers according to application type

Roof System

Solutions

Solar Tiles (Semi-) Transparent

Glass Solutions

Non-Transparent Glass

Solutions

Flexible Laminates

ertex-solar

Centrosolar

Conergy

Sulfurcell

Solarfabrik

Solarworld

Solon

systaic

Solarwatt

Clipsol (n.a.)

TENESOL

Intemper

Suntech

AtlantisEnergy

Sunpower

Imerys

CSS

Monier

SOLAIRE FRANCE

IdeaS Solar Kft

System Photonics

REM S.p.A.

3S Swiss Solar Systems

Panotron

Rheinzink

SES

SunTechnics Fabrisolar

Star Unity

Powerglaz

Solarcentury

Fangxing Solar Tile

Sharp

Applied Solar

Atlantis Energy

BP Solar

DOW Chemicals

GE Energy

Lumeta

Solar Red

ertex-solar

abakus solar AG

Schott Solar

Schüco

Solarfabrik

Solarnova

Solarwatt

Sunovation

Sunway

Würth-Solar

Clipsol

TENESOL

Solarday

EnergyGlass

Sapa-Solar

Scheuten Solar

ATERSA

Isofoton

Grupo Unisolar

Vidursolar

3S Swiss Solar System

Powerglaz

Dyesola

Suntech

Kaneka

Atlantis Energy Systems

HelioVolt

ertex-solar

Photowatt

Odersun

Schott Solar

Schüco

Solarwatt

Sunfilm AG

Solarnova

Sapa-Solar

Scheuten Solar

3S Swiss Solar Systems

Powerglaz

Trina Solar

Applied Solar

Heliovolt

Lumet

Kinmac Solar

Avancis

Johanna Solar

Monier

RES

Solibro

Sulfurcell

Sunway

Tenesol

Photowatt

System Photonic

Isofoton

T-Solar

Kaneka

Kyocera

EPV

TerraSolar

XSUNX

Heliatek

Odersun

PVFlex Solar

Solarion

Nuon Helianthos

Flexcell

Flisom

G-24 Innovations

Fuji Electric Systems

Mitsubishi Chemical

Peccell

CIS Solar

Applied Solar

Ascent Solar

GlobalSolarEnergy

Konarka

MiaSolé

Plextronic

PowerFilm Solar

Solarmer

SoloPower

Unisolar

Xunlight

monocrystalline

polycrystalline

a-Si/tandem

CIS/CIGS

Cdte

organic/nano


Outlook

The technological as well as technical production features of CIGS undoubtedly equip this technology with

the potential to prevail in the current technology race. Nothing new so far.

However, the simulation comparison indicated at which point CIGS is currently situated compared to each

competing technology. The findings may be somewhat surprising as the competitiveness of CIGS systems

with regard to certain applications is already given e.g. in the private rooftop segment. The fact that CIGS

modules can deliver another argument in their favour, namely their attractive appearance, supports their posi-

tion in this segment further.

However, a boom in CIGS fuelled alone by the rooftop segment seems unlikely as worldwide volume is li-

mited and the competition fierce. It is therefore of necessity to also establish a foothold in those customer

segments that are more focused on the rate of return which in this case is the commercial rooftop and open

space segment. Currently, competing thin film technologies and crystalline producers from the Far East are

setting the standards here. Competitiveness requires that ambitious roadmaps concerning increased efficiency

rates and a reduction in production costs, both of which are key leverage points, are implemented without

delay.

The question of, if and when these roadmaps will actually be implemented can only be answered by the ma-

nufacturers themselves. The developments of the past months have clearly improved the conditions required

for their successful realization. The attainment of a dimension crucial for mass production coupled with the

supply of tried and tested production equipment should enable established stakeholders as well as newco-

mers to put promising lab results into practice on an industrial level and, moreover, should bring about the

required cost cutting steps. Thus, an essential milestone would be within reach, and, CIGS technology could

assume its role as the main driver in furthering the development of thin film PV.


Outlook


DISCLAIMER

NEITHER HOEHNER RESEARCH & CONSULTING GROUP GMBH NOR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES

MAKES ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OR ASSUMES ANY LEGAL LIABILITY OR RE-

SPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS OF ANY INFORMATION,

PRODUCT, OR PROCESS DISCLOSED. THIS PRODUCT WAS PREPARED USING PROFESSIONAL

METHODS AND WITH GREAT CARE, TAKING ACCOUNT OF RELEVANT LEGISLATION. THE DATA

CONTAINED IN THIS PRODUCT IS BASED ON SURVEYS OF SAMPLE POPULATIONS, CONDUCTED

USING STANDARD STATISTICAL METHODS. AS SUCH, THE STUDY IS SUBJECT TO A CERTAIN

STATISTICAL ERROR RATE AND IS BASED EXCLUSIVELY ON THE FACTS WHICH WERE AVAILAB-

LE AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY.THE AUTHORS MAKE NO GUARANTEES THAT ANY DECISI-

ON BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BENEFIT YOU IN SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS,

OWING TO THE RISK THAT IS INVOLVED IN DECISION-MAKING OF ALMOST ANY KIND.

REFERENCE TO ANY SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL PRODUCT, PROCESS, OR SERVICE BY TRADE

NAME, TRADEMARK, MANUFACTURER, OR OTHERWISE DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE

OR IMPLY ITS ENDORSEMENT, RECOMMENDATION, OR FAVORING BY HOEHNER RESEARCH &

CONSULTING GROUP GMBH. OUR SALESPEOPLE, RESEARCH ANALYSTS, AND OTHER PROFES-

SIONALS MAY PROVIDE ORAL OR WRITTEN MARKET COMMENTARY TO OUR CLIENTS THAT

REFLECT OPINIONS THAT ARE CONTRARY TO VIEWS AND OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS PUBLI-

CATION. THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS OF AUTHORS EXPRESSED HEREIN DO NOT NECESSARILY

STATE OR REFLECT THOSE OF HOEHNER RESEARCH & CONSULTING GROUP GMBH.

NO PART OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE COPIED OR DUPLICATED IN ANY FORM BY ANY MEANS

OR REDISTRIBUTED OR PUBLISHED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOEHNER RE-

SEARCH & CONSULTING GROUP GMBH. UNAUTHORIZED COPYING OF THIS PUBLICATION IS

CONSIDERED A BREACH OF COPYRIGHT.


IMPRINT

LIST OF PICTURES:

Title picture: © Würth Solar

© a+f GmbH p. 6

© Würth Solar p. 8

© a+f GmbH p. 14

© Ina Schrievers, IBS Schrievers p. 30

Editor

EuPD Research Bonn

Adenauerallee 134

D-53113 Bonn

Tel +49 (0) 228 – 971 43 - 0

Fax +49 (0) 228 – 971 43 -11

[email protected]

www.eupd-research.com

Editor in Chief

Markus A.W. Hoehner

Author

Veit Robert Otto

Design and Printing

360Design

[email protected]

www.360Design.de

© EuPD Research 09/2010

EuPD Research® is a trade of

HOEHNER RESEARCH & CONSULTING GROUP GmbH.

EuPD Research® is a member of ESOMAR World Research.


WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New Thin Film … · WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New...

Documents

Transcript of WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New Thin Film … · WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology – The New...