CIGS Technology The New Thin Film Engine?

Transcription

1 WHITE PAPER CIGS Technology The New Thin Film Engine? EuPD White Paper Series 02/2010 September 2010

2 2

3 EuPD Research 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. 3

4 AGENDA Introduction...6 Will CIGS Lead Thin Film Out of the Crisis?...6 CIGS technology and its potential...8 Heterogeneous Technology - Heterogeneous Manufacturers...8 Highest Efficiency...10 Low Production Costs...11 Design and Flexibility...12 Potential and Reality Types of Application in Practice...13 CIGS Opportunities and Limits of a Versatile Technology...14 Private Rooftop Segment...14 Commercial Rooftop Segment...18 Open Space Segment...20 Building Integrated PV Classification and Potential...25 Outlook...30 Imprint EuPD Research May 2010

5 EuPD Research May

6 Introduction 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 lowcost 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 headlines 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. 6

7 Introduction Figure 1: Market development of different PV technologies (shipments in MWp) MWp 14,000 Source: EuPD Research ,000 9,228 MWp 10,000 8,000 6,000? 4,000 2,000 1,238 MWp 790 MWp 387 MWp CIGS a-si CdTe c-si 7

8 CIGS technology and its potential Heterogeneous Technology Heterogeneous Manufacturers Although some manufacturers refer to the technology as CIS or CIGSSe, CIGS is now the term most commonly 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 landscape. 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 launching pilot projects. Tried and tested modules can only be acquired from the established players of this technology 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 marketability. 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. 8

9 CIGS technology and its potential Figure 2: Overview of CIGS manufacturers Source: EuPD Research 2010 ISET Inc. AVANCIS 2009 Year of foundation 1980 USA Europe Japan Rest of Asia GSE flexible CIGS Cd-free production DayStar Techn. CIS Solartechnik HelioVolt Sulfurcell Miasolé Solarion Odersun Nanosolar XsunX Shurjo Energy AxunTek Solar Flisom AG CIS Solar Solyndra Ascent Solar Johanna SoloPower AQT Stion Solar PVflex Solar Telio Solar Sunshine PV TYONS Illies Renewable Sunvim Solar PVNext Jenn Feng Nexcis China Nuvo Nesi Solar Daiyang Metal Honda Soltec Solar Frontier Würth Solar Solibro R&D-Phase Stage of development in terms of output 2009 (MWp) Massproduction 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 manufacturers. 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. 9

10 CIGS technology and its potential 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 possible. An increase to this extent can not be attributed to any other technology at this moment in time. Figure 3: Efficiency according to technology Efficiency in % 30 Source: EuPD Research SunPower, Mitsubishi Electric, 2010 ZSW, 2010 NREL, 2001 Uni-Solar, Oerlikon, 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 10

11 CIGS technology and its potential 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 manufacturers. 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 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 substantial 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 entered 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. 11

12 CIGS technology and its potential Figure 4: Experience curves for CdTe and CIGS Source: EuPD Research /Wp 3.0 /Wp 2.5 /Wp 2.29* 2.0 /Wp 1.5 /Wp 1.0 /Wp * 1.09* 0.96* Learning rate 15% 0.84* 0.68* 0.59* 0.5 /Wp $ - rate = 0,78 * According to company statements 0 1 MWp 10 MWp 100 MWp 1,000 MWp 10,000 MW Learning rate 20% First Solar CIGS 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 semitransparent 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. 12

13 CIGS technology and its potential Flexible PV modules can already be used innovatively in BIPV as well as on less-stable rooftops or small portable 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 already 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 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, substrates 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 potential of building integrated PV shall be subject to examination. 13

14 CIGS Opportunities and Limits of a Versatile Technology 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 meters 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 capacity of 473 MWp were installed in Germany in 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 Solar, 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 positioned 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. 14

15 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 Location Horizontal global irradiation in kwh/m² Collector plane orientation Effective irriadance on collectors in kwh/m² Shadings Roof area in m² Würzburg, Germany 1, ,173 no shadings 30 System factors CIS / CIGS mono Module Manufacturer Module Model Unit Nom. Power in Wp Efficiency in % Total number of PV modules Module area m² System performance in kwp (STC) Energy Yield in kwh/kwp/year Performance Ratio in % Produced energy in kwh/year (simulation) Würth Solar WSG 0036 E , ,278 SunPower SPR-425E-WHT-D ,081 Inverter Manufacturer Inverter Model Operating Voltage Total number of inverters Unit Nom. Power Inverter loss during operation in % Mastervolt Sunmaster XS V 1 Unit 3.30 kw AC 5.7 Fronius IG V 1 Unit 5.10 kw AC 5.7 Investment conditions CIS / CIGS mono Average feed-in remuneration in /kwh System price in per kwp Total 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 credit Date of commissioning Interest rate in % Disaggio in % Credit period in years Interest and debt payments ,577 11, annual ,426 17, annual 15

16 CIGS Opportunities and Limits No Surprises in the First Instance As graph 6 demonstrates, returns are almost identical when identical kwp prices are assumed. However, realistic 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 average system size of 9.5 kwp. From a total of 21 offers for CIGS modules, a price of 3,577 kwp was calculated for mid size systems of approximately 8.7 kwp. Figure 6: IRR comparison in the private rooftop segment 15.0% Source: EuPD Research 2010 Efficiency in % 10.0% 5.01% 3.83% 0.0% 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 3,426 3,577 mono CIGS System price in /kwp 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. 16

17 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 efficiency 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 indifference 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. 17

18 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 megawatt. 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 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

19 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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, ,113 no shadings 2,000 System factors CIS / CIGS poly mono Module Manufacturer Module Model Unit Nom. Power in Wp Efficiency in % Total number of PV modules Module area m² System performance in kwp (STC) Energy Yield in kwh/kwp/year Performance Ratio in % Produced energy in kwh/year (simulation) Solibro SL ,124 1, Trina Solar TSM-230 P ,216 1, SunPower SPR-280/B-WHT-I ,224 1, ,8 319 Inverter Manufacturer Inverter Model Operating Voltage Total number of inverters Unit Nom. Power Inverter loss during operation in % Santerno SUNWAY TG V - MT V 1 Unit 220 kw AC 2.8 Santerno SUNWAY TG V - MT V 1 Unit 280 kw AC 3.0 Santerno SUNWAY TG V - MT V 1 Unit 350 kw AC 3.0 Investment conditions CIS / CIGS poly mono Average feed-in remuneration in /kwh System price in per kwp Total 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 credit Date of commissioning Interest rate in % Disaggio in % Credit period in years Interest and debt payments , , , , annual , , , , annual ,036 1,041, , , annual 19

20 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 percent, 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, , , % 4.30% 4.04% 176, , , 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 system 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

21 CIGS Opportunities and Limits Figure 9: Sensitivity analysis with respect to efficiency and system price Source: EuPD Research % 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 12.74% 12,74% 11.00% 11,0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 4,000 3,500 3,163 3,000 2,691 2,500 21

22 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 Solergy 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 compete 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. 22

23 CIGS Opportunities and Limits Figure 10: Assumptions and system configurations in the open space 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 Freiburg, Germany 1, ,201 no shadings no limit System factors CIS / CIGS CdTe Module Manufacturer Module Model Unit Nom. Power in Wp Efficiency in % Total number of PV modules Module area m² System performance in kwp (STC) Energy Yield in kwh/kwp/year Performance Ratio in % Produced energy in kwh/year (simulation) Würth Solar WSG 0036 E ,500 45,564 5,000 1, ,442 First Solar FS ,512 46,449 5,000 1, ,209 Inverter Manufacturer Inverter Model Operating Voltage Total number of inverters Unit Nom. Power Inverter loss during operation in % SMA Sunny Central 1250MV V 4 Units 5,000 kw AC 2.8 SMA Sunny Central 1250MV V 4 Units 5,000 kw AC 2.8 Investment conditions CIS / CIGS CdTe Average feed-in remuneration in /kwh System price in per kwp Total 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 credit Date of commissioning Interest rate in % Disaggio in % Credit period in years Interest and debt payments (no conversion area) 3, ,000, , , annual (no conversion area) 2, ,000, , , annual 23

24 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 kilowatt peak. Figure 11: Return comparison in the open space segment 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 -5.0 m -6.0 m Source: EuPD Research 2010 Net present value Interest rate = 8.0% CdTe = 0.99 m CIGS = 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 System price in /kwp 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 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 million Euro for CIGS. 24

25 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 concept has been delivered by CIGS technology leaders which, with reference to the announcements of an efficiency 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 18.0% Source: EuPD Research % 14.0% 13.5% Efficiency in % 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 11.0% 1% = 269 /kwp 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,328 2,000 System price in /kwp 25

26 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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 locations around the world. Figure 13: CIGS performance ratio in different climate zones Source: EuPD Research 2010 Horizontal global irradiation: 1,113 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 87.6 % Horizontal global irradiation: 1,924 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 86.7 % Los Angeles Horizontal global irradiation: 2,132 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 84.5 % Lima Freiburg Kairo Horizontal global irradiation: 2,091 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 85.4 % Horizontal global irradiation: 1,756 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 84.7 % Bangkok Perth Horizontal global irradiation: 1,936 kwh/m² Ø Ambient temperature: ºC Performance Ratio: 86.4 % 26

27 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 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. 27

28 CIGS Opportunities and Limits What is BIPV? What is its market potential? BIPV stands for building integrated photovoltaic. It substitutes building components with PV systems. Generally 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, Italy, 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 cooperation with the construction industry. This is predominantly predicted for more mature markets with a substantial 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. 28

29 CIGS Opportunities and Limits Figure 14: Largest BIPV markets of the future Source: EuPD Research 2010 Which country markets will be the largest for BIPV installations in the future? France Germany Italy 39.1 USA 34.5 Spain 24.1 China Japan Switzerland UAE Netherlands Scandinavia n. a % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Multiple answers possible n = 87 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 already 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. 29

30 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 Imerys ertex-solar ertex-solar Heliatek Centrosolar CSS abakus solar AG Photowatt Odersun Conergy Monier Schott Solar Odersun PVFlex Solar Sulfurcell SOLAIRE FRANCE Schüco Schott Solar Solarion Solarfabrik IdeaS Solar Kft Solarfabrik Schüco Nuon Helianthos Solarworld System Photonics Solarnova Solarwatt Flexcell Solon REM S.p.A. Solarwatt Sunfilm AG Flisom systaic 3S Swiss Solar Systems Sunovation Solarnova G-24 Innovations Solarwatt Panotron Sunway Sapa-Solar Fuji Electric Systems Clipsol (n.a.) Rheinzink Würth-Solar Scheuten Solar Mitsubishi Chemical TENESOL SES Clipsol 3S Swiss Solar Systems Peccell Intemper SunTechnics Fabrisolar TENESOL Powerglaz CIS Solar Suntech Star Unity Solarday Trina Solar Applied Solar AtlantisEnergy Powerglaz EnergyGlass Applied Solar Ascent Solar Sunpower Solarcentury Sapa-Solar Heliovolt GlobalSolarEnergy Fangxing Solar Tile Scheuten Solar Lumet Konarka Sharp ATERSA Kinmac Solar MiaSolé Applied Solar Isofoton Avancis Plextronic Atlantis Energy Grupo Unisolar Johanna Solar PowerFilm Solar BP Solar Vidursolar Monier Solarmer DOW Chemicals 3S Swiss Solar System RES SoloPower GE Energy Powerglaz Solibro Unisolar Lumeta Dyesola Sulfurcell Xunlight Solar Red Suntech Sunway Kaneka Tenesol Atlantis Energy Systems Photowatt HelioVolt System Photonic Isofoton T-Solar Kaneka Kyocera EPV TerraSolar XSUNX monocrystalline polycrystalline a-si/tandem CIS/CIGS Cdte organic/nano 30

31 CIGS Opportunities and Limits 31

32 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 position in this segment further. However, a boom in CIGS fuelled alone by the rooftop segment seems unlikely as worldwide volume is limited 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 manufacturers 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 newcomers 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. 32

33 Outlook 33

34 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. 34

35 IMPrINT Editor EuPD Research Bonn Adenauerallee 134 D Bonn Tel +49 (0) Fax +49 (0) Editor in Chief Markus A.W. Hoehner Author Veit Robert Otto Design and Printing 360Design EuPD Research 09/2010 EuPD Research is a trade of HOEHNER RESEARCH & CONSULTING GROUP GmbH. EuPD Research is a member of ESOMAR World Research. 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