4.7 Article

TOPCon-Technology options for cost efficient industrial manufacturing

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.solmat.2021.111100

关键词

Passivated contacts; TOPCon; a-Si deposition; Cost-analysis; Cost of ownership; Levelized cost of electricity

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy within the project TOPCon Cluster [03EE1065A]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper discusses cost-driven strategies towards industrial manufacturing of TOPCon-based solar cells, evaluating various process routes and pointing out uneven distribution of capital and operational costs in the production process. The study finds that TOPCon concepts can remain economically competitive against bifacial PERC if a minimum absolute gain in cell efficiency is maintained.
Formation of an interfacial tunnel oxide capped by the polysilicon (poly-Si) layer is one of the most promising methods to realize carrier-selective contacts as it offers an evolutionary upgrade to the current mainstream PERC. Currently, PV industry is looking towards different technologically feasible options of transferring this cell concept from laboratory research towards industrial manufacturing. In this paper, we devise cost-driven strategies towards industrial manufacturing of TOPCon-based solar cells after assessing various process routes based on currently production-ready and upcoming future alternative process technologies. Our techno-economic assessment suggests that higher capital and operational costs required for TOPCon concept is distributed unevenly in the process value chain, with a significant fraction in diffusion/annealing and metallization steps. Nevertheless, under given assumptions, TOPCon-concepts are found to remain economically competitive against bifacial PERC in terms of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), if a minimum absolute gain in cell efficiency Delta eta > 0.55% for most-conservative and Delta eta > 0.40% for most-progressive scenarios respectively can be maintained.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据