• Thursday, October 8, 2009 Latest Update: 12:31PM

Greentech Solar

Solarion Plans for 10MW-Plus Commercial Line in 2010

The company has been producing CIGS thin films with plastic substrate at its 200-kilowatt pilot line, and is now set for commercial product launch next year.

After years in R&D and pilot production mode, Solarion plans to start commercial production with a factory line in 2010 that could churn out more than 10 megawatts of thin-film panels per year.

The German company, which develops copper-indium-gallium-selenide cells using plastic instead of metal backing, is looking at setting up the production line in Leipzig, where the company is based, said Stefan Nitzsche, a spokesman for Solarion, in an email.

Solarion currently runs a pilot production line capable of producing 200 kilowatts of CIGS cells per year, Nitzsche said.

Solarion has come a long way since the company's start in 2000. It produces its thin films in rolls, using its own ion-beam assisted deposition (IBAD) technology to lay down the CIGS materials onto a sheet of polymer.

The company said its technology addresses the challenge of making solar cells with plastic, which can't withstand high temperatures during production or while under the sun. Using the IBAD tool also creates cells with even quality, Solarion said.

Using plastic, ideally, should cut manufacturing cost as well. Most other CIGS thin-film developers are putting their solar cells on glass or metal foil – they are likely to cost more. The glass, being heavier, also would cost more to ship.

The best cells Solarion could produce could convert 13.4 percent of the sunlight that fall on them into electricity, a result that was verified by the Fraunhofer Institute of Solar Energy Systems.

The average efficiency of the cells from its pilot line is lower, but still more than 10 percent, the company said. The standard cells are larger than the test cells submitted to Fraunhofer.

Solarion expects solar panels from its commercial line to have 8 percent to 10 percent efficiency, Nitzsche said.

A fellow CIGS-on-plastic developer, Ascent Solar Technologies (NSDQ: ASTI) in Thornton, Colo., also is rolling out solar panels with similar efficiencies.

Ascent began pilot production earlier this year, and panels from that line could achieve 10.4 percent efficiency, the company said in July. The average efficiency hovers around 8 percent to 9 percent, the company added. Ascent plans open a 30-megawatt factory in early 2010 (see Ascent Solar Makes CIGS on Plastic).

Solarion hopes to tackle two market segments. It plans to encase its CIGS thin films in glass for rooftop or ground-mounted solar energy systems. It already has posted product specs for this type of solar panels, labeled SOL100GG.

The company also is marketing its flexible thin films to building material makers.

The building material market is tiny but poses a great opportunity. More roofing material makers are launching products embedded with solar cells.

Earlier this week, Dow Chemical said it plans to launch roofing shingles with CIGS cells from Tucson, Ariz.-based Global Solar Energy in 2010 (see Dow to Roofers: Our Solar Shingles Are Coming). Global Solar makes its CIGS thin films with stainless steel backing.

Johns Manville, another major roofing material maker in the United States, has a deal to buy amorphous-silicon thin films from Rochester Hills, Mich.-based United Solar Ovonic and assemble them into its termaplastic polyolefin (TPO) roofing membranes (see Roofing Giant Johns Manville Enters Solar Market).

Solarion raised its first round in 2002 and added two more rounds since, including the most recent one in 2008. Nitzsche declined to disclose the amount. In 2003, it began to build its pilot production line and later did some research and development work for the European Space Agency.

Comments [9]

  • ECD Fan 10/8/09 1:23 PM

    Ucilia:  I believe you are mistaken about the “building material market” posing a great opportunity.  Except in France and maybe in a couple of other small geographies, there are no special BIPV tariffs, and thus the PV markets are just two: rooftop PV and ground-mounted PV.  BIPV will remain a niche with a declining share, as it inevitably has higher installed cost per Watt and underperforms regular rooftop PV in terms of yield (KWH/KW).  Unless all these new players can dramatically lower their manufacturing costs, they will fail, even if their efficiencies are in the 10%-11% range and even if they can prove that their products can last 20+ years without severe degradation - it is very hard to compete with the 11%-efficient First Solar modules that cost 90c per Watt to make or with the low-cost crystalline panels that are 14%+efficient.

    Reply
      • Ucilia Wang 10/8/09 3:39 PM

        Hi ECD Fan, blending solar cells into building materials is appealing for aesthetic and practical reasons. The BIPV market also is shaping up to have different dynamics than conventional solar-panel market. You are seeing a strong interest from roofing material makers and new-home builders. The economics there—and the cost recovery for homeowners—would likely be different than buying modules from retailers.  8-10% efficiencies aren’t the end of the tech development roadmap for BIPV products.

  • rooferguy 10/9/09 11:00 AM

    Not many people have actually installed shingle-level PV panels.  It’s hard to imagine a solar shingle that would meet the fire rating requirements unless there is layer of non-combustible material between the shingle and PV material.  Moreover, every shingle needs a pair of wires (+ and -).  If there’s any metal frame, every shingle needs a ground connection to meet NEC requirements.

    So the reality of installing 5 kw of solar shingles (say each one has 10 watts of output, about a square foot) is that you’ll need 1,000 wiring connections (+ and -), and maybe another 500 ground connections.  Do you want that on the surface of your roof, in an accessible attic, or concealed between roofing materials?  Or not at all.

    The practical and reliable alternative is to get standard solar panels that can achieve the same output with only 50 wiring connections and 25 grounding connections (200 watt panels), all done underneath the panels in an accessible place.  Potentially those 75 wiring connections can be reduced to zero if any of those new plug & play AC modules are installed.

    Because of fire and wiring concerns, BIPV solar shingles have historically been a great idea hitting the impenetrable walls of reality.  Sort of like a flying car.

    Reply
      • StevePluvia 10/9/09 11:09 AM

        Roofer, or put another way—SOS—_hit on a shingle =)

      • Ucilia Wang 10/9/09 11:51 AM

        Hey Rooferguy, thanks for the pointers about installation challenges. Dow’s shingles are undergoing UL testing now, so any fire safety issues should be dealt with during that process. We will see.

      • ECD Fan 10/9/09 11:59 AM

        Ucilia:  You are mistaken that UL certification, by itself, will prevent BIPV fires.  Unisolar’s solar shingles (SHR-17) started selling in 1998 and did not lose their UL certification until years later (now, of course, they have been taken off the market).  And the Unisolar laminates on the rooftop of the Long Beach Convention Center did ignite in February of 2008, shutting down that 750KW BIPV installation for good (the laminates were glued to velcro, which was then attached to the roof).  Funny stuff.

  • rooferguy 10/9/09 12:14 PM

    Steve - HAH!  We must remember never to lose our sense of humor.

    Ucilla - the shingles must get a UL listing to be eligible for incentives (at least here on the east coast).  This listing will indicate the fire rating (usually Class A, B or C).  Almost all solar panels are B or C (unless they have two layers of glass, which can get an “A” rating, but then they weigh a lot).  Class B and C panels require an additional barrier between the roof and the panels.  All of the concrete tile replacement products (GE, Sharp, SunPower, etc.) require a layer of composition roof material UNDERNEATH the tiles.  I would expect the same requirement would apply for the Dow product.  So in a bizarre way, these BIPV products still require a separate fire and/or water barrier underneath — building code requirements, not UL requirements.

    Granted, shingles look much better than ordinary racked solar panels.  But in my experience the rat’s nest of wires in a virtually inaccessible location is an almost insurmountable reliability problem.  Now that the industry is excited about AC panels (inherently safer and easier to install), I don’t see how shingles would be cost effective on a long term basis (until they invent a pico-inverter).

    Reply
.