4.8 Article

A Cost Analysis of Fully Solution-Processed ITO-Free Organic Solar Modules

Journal

ADVANCED ENERGY MATERIALS
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/aenm.201802521

Keywords

bottom-up cost model; levelized cost of energy; minimum sustainable price; single solar module; tandem solar modules

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [21702154, 51773157]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province [2017CFB118]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2042017kf0269]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Organic photovoltaics (OPVs) have become a potential candidate for clean and renewable photovoltaic productions. This work examines the current cost drivers and potential avenues to reduce costs for organic solar modules by constructing a comprehensive bottom-up cost model. The direct manufacturing cost (MC) and the minimum sustainable price (MSP) for an opaque single solar module (SSM) (MC = 187 yen m(-2), MSP = 297 yen m(-2)) and for a tandem solar module (MC = 224 yen m(-2), MSP = 438 yen m(-2)) are analyzed in detail. Within this calculation, the most expensive layers and processing steps are identified and highlighted. Importantly, the low levelized cost of energy (LCOE) value for an SSM with a 10% power conversion efficiency in a 20-year range from 0.185 to 0.486 yen kWh(-1), with a national average of 0.324 yen kWh(-1) in China under an average solar irradiance of 1200 kWh m(-2) year(-1). Moreover, the impact on the cost of alternative materials and constructions, process throughputs, module efficiency, and module lifetime, etc., is presented and avenues to further reduce the MSP and LCOE values are indicated. The analysis shows that OPVs can emerge as a competitive alternative to established power generation technologies if the remaining issues (e.g., active layer material cost, module efficiency, and lifetime) can be resolved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available