deliverable n° 11.2 - rs ia “final report on technical ... d11.2 final report... · 2.3.2 main...

SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Project no: 502687 NEEDS

New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability

INTEGRATED PROJECT Priority 6.1: Sustainable Energy Systems and, more specifically,

Sub-priority 6.1.3.2.5: Socio-economic tools and concepts for energy strategy.

Deliverable n° 11.2 - RS Ia “Final report on technical data, costs and life cycle

inventories of PV applications” Due date of deliverable: 15.12.2006 Actual submission date: 22.12.2005 Start date of project: 1 September 2004 Duration: 48 months Organisation name for this deliverable: AMBIENTE ITALIA Deliverable coordinator: Paolo Frankl Authors: Paolo Frankl, Emanuela Menichetti and Marco Raugei with contributions by Simona Lombardelli and Giacomo Prennushi

Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2006)

Dissemination Level PU Public X

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services)

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)

NEEDS RS 1a – WP11 Technology specification: photovoltaic systems

2

CONTENTS

1 Photovoltaic power systems today 3 1.1 Introduction 3 1.2 PV systems 3 1.3 PV module technologies 4

1.3.1 Crystalline silicon PV modules 5 1.3.2 Thin film PV modules 6

1.4 Present reference systems 6 2 PV technology development pathway 7

2.1 PV hot spots 9 2.2 Driving forces 13

2.2.1 Regulatory framework 13 2.2.2 Climate change policy 14 2.2.3 Decentralised distribution system 15 2.2.4 Technological and cross-sectorial spillovers 15 2.2.5 Competitive and dynamic market 16 2.2.6 The role of finance 17

2.3 The anticipated role of PV in a future energy supply system 17 2.3.1 What can be reached? Development targets for PV up to 2050 20 2.3.2 Main competitors of PV systems and benchmark technologies 22

2.4 The technology development pathway of PV 27 2.4.1 Which technology developments are necessary? 27 2.4.2 How likely are these technology developments? 31 2.4.3 Specification of future PV systems in 2050 33

2.5 PV Technology Road Maps 35 2.5.1 Short-term projections till 2010 35 2.5.2 Road Map n.1 – “Very Optimistic / Technological Breakthrough” scenario 37 2.5.3 Road Map n.2 - “Optimistic / Realistic” scenario 40 2.5.4 Road Map n.3 – “Pessimistic” scenario 42 2.5.5 Comparison of the three Road Maps and associated PV cost reductions 44

3 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of current Photovoltaic Technology 50 3.1 Technology description 50 3.2 Discussion of key issues 50 3.3 Key emissions and land use 51 3.4 Contribution analysis and interpretation 53

4 LCA of future Photovoltaic Technology 54 4.1 Technology description and material flows 54 4.2 Results 56

4.2.1 Contribution analysis 57 References 58 5 Annex 60

5.1 Annex I– Minimum list of current photovoltaic technologies 60 5.2 Annex II – Minimum list of future photovoltaic scenarios 73

5.2.1 Very Optimistic scenario 73 5.2.2 Realistic Optimistic scenario 75 5.2.3 Pessimistic scenario 78


3

1 Photovoltaic power systems today

1.1 Introduction

Photovoltaic (PV) systems are energy devices, which directly convert sun energy into electricity. The basic building block of a PV system is the PV cell, which is a semiconductor device converting solar energy into direct current (DC) electricity. PV cells are low voltage (around 0,5 V) and high current density (around 3A) devices. More cells in series form a PV module. Typical peak power of module in commerce is 50-150 Wp

1, although in few cases it arrives up to 300 Wp for specific application in architecture.. More modules connected in series form a so-called string. More strings connected in parallel form the actual PV field (or PV-“generator”). PV systems are highly modular. The installed power of different PV applications ranges from 0,5 Wp to several MWp.

1.2 PV systems

PV systems need more components than just the module to produce useful electricity. The components vary in function of the type of electrical connection (grid-connected or off-grid) and the type of mounting structure (ground-mounted power plants for centralised electricity production vs. building-integrated systems for distributed generation). The ensemble of additional components is usually referred to with the term “Balance of System” (BOS). According to IEA-PVPS (2004), four main application types exist: - Off-grid domestic (stand alone) systems - Off-grid non-domestic installations - Grid-connected distributed PV systems - Grid-connected centralized systems

Historically, PV stand-alone systems for rural areas have been the first most diffused application of PV because they often represent the most economically viable solution for rural electricity supply. However, more recently, the diffusion of grid-connected building-integrated systems for distributed generation has been increasing exponentially. This type of application has been prevailing on the total PV market since 1998 and it accounted for around 60% of total cumulative installed capacity in 2003 (Figure 1). This trend is even expected to increase in the next 10 years. Centralised systems (ground-mounted power plants) have been the first kind of grid-connected PV systems. However, due to the high costs of PV and to the large amount of needed surface, this kind of plants have had a very limited development in the last 10 years in OECD countries. This trend is expected to hold in future years in Europe. However, there is a large future potential of very large-scale power plants in desert areas. A 100 MW project for the Gobi desert is currently being designed (Ito et al. 2003).

1 The term peak power (expressed in peak Watt – Wp) indicates the maximum power produced by a PV device when exposed to sun radiation under Standard Test Conditions (1000 W/m2, cell temperature of 25 °C)


4

Figure 1 - Cumulative installed PV capacity in function of application. Retrieved from the IEA-PVPS website, http://www.iea-pvps.org As far as the balance of system is concerned, the first distinction to be made is between centralized systems (ground mounted power plant), and building-integrated systems. In the first case the system simply consists of a PV field, which occupies large areas. Typical materials used are steel and reinforced concrete. However, very recently very large installations have been built, which employ wooden mounting structures. With respect to integrated building systems, a great variety of application does exist. First of all, a distinction to be made is between retrofit installation on existing building and integrated systems in new buildings or in buildings under extraordinary maintenance. The second distinction is in function of the used surface (roofs vs. façade). The third classification is between opaque PV cladding (e.g. roofs) and semi-transparent systems (e.g. skylights, façade windows, etc.). The latter are anticipated to be the main application for PV in many industrialized countries. Japan, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland are already progressing in this direction. The main attractive aspect is that costs can be reduced avoiding the purchase of land and building components, and the transmission and distribution costs. As for the electrical BOS, many types of inverter exist according to the PV system capacity. Generally one inverter is used for the whole array, even if, at present separate inverters can be used to connect each ‘string’ of modules or even mounted on the back of individual modules, permitting easy system expansion, independent operation and easier installation. The efficiency of inverters generally vary between 90% and 96%. Estimates from PVNET (2004) indicate an improvement (98%) in inverter performance by the next decade (2020).

1.3 PV module technologies

The term “PV modules” actually embraces a large variety of PV technologies, based on different semiconductor devices. The main distinction is between PV modules made of crystalline semiconductor (single and multi crystalline silicon) and thin films (amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride, copper indium diselenide). As shown in Figure 2, currently crystalline silicon technology still dominates the market, while thin-films represent from 6 to 12% in terms of installed capacity, according to different sources.


5

Figure 2 – Present technology market share (adapted from various sources)

1.3.1 Crystalline silicon PV modules

Wafer-based crystalline silicon currently represents the main technological route for the production of PV modules and it is envisaged to remain so for the next 15 years (EPIA 2004a). Crystalline silicon modules are typically produced by growing ingots of silicon, slicing the ingots to make solar cells, electrically interconnecting the cells, and encapsulating the strings of cells to form a module. The main advantages of this technology can be summarised as follows: - Established technological background (derived from the electronic industry) - Availability of the source - Reliability

Among the drawbacks reported (PV-TRAC 2005): - Overall silicon feedstock of affordable quality and price is still relatively low - Material costs are higher compared to thin-film modules - Manufacturing is often not yet optimally automated - Current silicon feedstock production is energy intensive.

The two main typologies of crystalline silicon are: single crystalline silicon (c-Si) and multi-crystalline (mc-Si). Sc-Si is characterised by atomic layers all oriented in the same direction in a single silicon crystal. High purity crystal implies higher cell efficiencies (up to 16%), thanks to better drift of photo-excited electrons from the junction area to the electric contacts. Single crystalline wafers are grown using the same technology used by electronic industry for chip manufacturing (e.g. Czochralsky growth of silicon ingot, then cut into wafers of a typical thickness of 250-350 μm). Multi-crystalline silicon is made of a set of single-crystalline, small-area, sc-Si clusters. Clusters all oriented in different directions, giving the aesthetical effect of non homogeneous reflection of the wafer. In fact, the borders of cluster areas are a semiconductor “defect”, leading to poorer electron transmission and therefore lower cell efficiency. Mc-Si ingots are made with technologies specifically developed for PV applications (e.g. directional solidification). More recently, ribbon technologies have been developed. In this technology wafers in form of ribbons are pulled directly from the silicon, without the production of the ingot and the need to cut it in wafers. This technology has tendentially similar efficiencies like mc-Si but a much better utilization rate of silicon feedstock.

mc-Si55%-62%

sc-Si29%-33%

CIS/CIGS0,5%-0,7%a-Si,

mc-Si/a-Si4,5%-11%

CdTe0,4%-1%

Ribbons / sheets c-Si

1%-4,3%


6

1.3.2 Thin film PV modules

Thin films are based on a complete different manufacturing approach: instead of producing an ingot and then cutting it into wafers, thin films are obtained by depositing extremely thin layers of photosensitive materials on a low cost backing such as glass, stainless steel or plastic. The first thin film produced historically was amorphous silicon (a-Si). More recently, other thin film technologies have been developed in the area of II-VI semiconductor compounds, i.e. Cadmium Telluride (CdTe) and Copper-Indium-Diselenide (CIS). Adding small amounts of Gallium to the absorbing CuInSe2 layer (CIGS modules) improves the efficiency of the device. Layer thickness of thin films is very low, ranging from 40-60 μm of amorphous silicon down to less than 10 μm of CdTe. Therefore, much less material is needed to produce cells / modules. Particularly in the case of a-Si, so far efficiencies are significantly lower than the ones of crystalline silicon modules. However, it is worth noticing that very recently almost 10% thin film modules (e.g. CIGS) entered the market. The main advantages of thin films are: - Low consumption of raw material - Suitable for building integration, due to flexibility and better appearance of the modules - High automation of production (less labour intensive)

The disadvantages commonly reported are: - Lower efficiency rates with respect to crystalline - Less experience on the modules’ lifetime performance - Production units are still small.

1.4 Present reference systems

Table 1 summarizes the main parameters which describe the state-of-the-art of PV technology. Wafer-based c-Si Thin films

sc-Si mc-Si a-Si

CdTe CIS

Module efficiency (%) 12%-15%

11%-14% 5%-7% 6%-7,5% 9%-10%

Maximum recorded module efficiency (%)

22,7% 15,3% - 10,5% 12,1%

Maximum recorded laboratory efficiency (%)

24,7% 19,8% 12,7% 16,0% 18,2%

Main applications Centralized and distributed grid-

connected systems (incl.

BIPV);

Remote industrial and rural

Centralized and distributed grid-

connected systems (incl.

BIPV);

Remote industrial and rural

Consumer products; off-grid

rural; building integration

Grid-connected systems;

Building integration

Grid-connected systems;

Building integration

Table 1 – Technical parameters of current PV systems (elaborated from: IEA-PVPS)


7

2 PV technology development pathway

PV is currently characterised by a wide range of technology routes and end-use applications. Furthermore, new solutions and technological improvements are expected in the future. The paragraphs which follow describe into detail the reference technology scenarios which are likely to constitute the envisaged future for PV up to 2050. They are based on the review of the most updated technology and policy roadmaps for the PV, as well as on information gathered from previous EU research projects, specialised magazines, companies’ websites and direct contacts. In particular, the following technology-specific sources have been consulted: - EC/DG JRC/IES “PV Status Report 2005”, August 2005 - EC/PV-TRAC “A vision for Photovoltaic Technology”, February 2005 - EPIA and Greenpeace “Solar generation”, October 2004 - EPIA “EPIA Roadmap”, May 2004 - US Photovoltaic Industry “Roadmap through 2030 and beyond, September 2004EREC “Renewable

Energy Scenario to 2040”, May 2004 - EC/PV-NET “European Roadmap for PV R&D”, April 2004 - SHELL “Energy Needs, Choices and Possibilities / Scenarios to 2050, 2001The scope of the different studies is summarised in Table 2.

Despite different pathways based on more or less optimistic scenarios, all the sources describe a positive framework for the PV, which is likely to achieve an impressive growth rate both at European and world level. This result is granted by a series of unique properties retained by the technology, which could lead to a far higher exploitation than the one currently recorded. However, a credible penetration scheme in a long horizon timeframe must consider the main technological and non-technological barriers which actually hamper a broader diffusion of the PV in the energy market. Our vision for the PV technology diffusion has been developed under the following logical scheme: - First of all, a series of positive and negative features of the PV have been identified and selected as the

key parameters to be either enhanced or overcome in order to reduce the barriers to diffusion - Secondly, a set of key diffusion drivers have been analysed, among those reported in the above-listed

documentary sources and other notable references The mentioned items will be briefly discussed in the next paragraphs.

Table 2 – Summary of the main findings from the roadmaps analysed

Items

EC/PV-TRAC: A Vision for Photovoltaic Technology

EREC: Renewable Energy Scenario to 2040

EC/PV-NET: European

Roadmap for PV R&D

EPIA: Roadmap

US PV Industry: Our Solar Power

Future - Roadmap through

2030 and beyond

SHELL: Energy Needs, Choices

and Possibilities. Scenarios to 2050

Year 02/2005 05/2004 04/2004 05/2004 09/2004 2001

Time horizon

2030 2040 2010 - 2020 2010 -2020 2050 2050

Focus Photovoltaic Technology

Renewable energy PV Technology

Evolution

PV Technology, EU Industry and Market Evolution

US Industry and Market Evolution

Energy

Scenario(s) Single scenario:

“A vision for photovoltaics”

AIP “Advanced international policies

scenario” DCP “Dynamic current

Policies scenario”

Single scenario about evolution of

different technologies

Single scenario about evolution of

technology, EU industry and market

Baseline scenario (BAU)Roadmap case

“Dynamics as usual” (DAU) “The Spirit of the Coming

Age” (SCA)

Approach

Challenge and Driving Forces identification; Socio-economic and

technological indicators trend up to

2030; Actions to meet

scenario

Drivers identification; Drivers trend for each

scenario definition; Indicators performances

for scenarios

Technology and Indicators

classification; Indicators

performances; Recommendations

to meet the scenario

General objectives and areas of analysis;

Specific fields of actionand indicators;

Indicators targets to meet goals;

Suggested support scheme

Scenario description and hypothesis;

Indicators targets

Context forces identification;

Drivers definition; Scenario description

2.1 PV hot spots

Among the strong and weak points commonly reported, the following have been selected as they best represent the major issues of concern about the technology and the unique potential of PV with respect to other available technologies, respectively (see Table 3). Each one will be briefly discussed.

Table 3 – PV hot spots Weak points / barriers Strong points / diffusion factors High direct costs High direct cost reduction potential Low energy density Efficiency increase achievable - Low efficiency Huge amount of available surface on buildings - Low number of operating hours per year Integration with energy-passive devices

Intermittent source Visual integration possible - No storage Abundance of the primary source

High social acceptability

High direct costs It is a matter of fact that PV is currently characterised by high production costs and that the challenge for the industry is to abate them by maintaining or even enhancing the product performance.

Low energy density Another drawback of PV systems is their relatively low energy density, because of both low efficiency and a low number of operating hours per year. Due to still low conversion efficiencies, PV systems need large surface areas (however, these are to be compared also to the amount of available surface on buildings, see below). Moreover, the number of operating hours per year is limited. For example the number of equivalent irradiation (1kWp/m2) hours per year range from 800-900 in Germany to 1800-2000 in Southern Spain.

Source intermittence Of course, PV systems just function when the sun shines. This means that other back-up energy sources must be available in order to compensate the missing contribution of PV, either at night or with cloudy weather. Another problem is the impact of an intermittent source in an electricity grid. However, this is expected to occur just when the share of PV will overcome 15%-20% of total electricity supply. At that time, affordable storage systems, advanced grid-management systems and other back-up renewable energy technologies will be available (see also section 2.4.2)

Cost reduction potential While present costs are still high, all PV technologies have a very significant cost reduction potential. In the past, PV module costs have been declining with a learning ratio of 20% (i.e. a cost reduction of 20% per each doubling of cumulative production). This trend is likely to continue in the future, leading to significant cost reductions (see section 2.3.2).

Efficiency increase All PV technologies are still far from maturity and have a significant potential for improvement. Commercial cell efficiencies are significantly lower than the ones obtained in laboratory and are far below theoretical limits (see section 2.4.1).


10

Availability of surface

Among electricity production technologies, PV systems have the quite unique feature that they can be integrated in buildings (both on roofs and facades). There is a huge potential for BIPV systems worldwide, as shown in Table 4. This implies that, despite still low efficiencies and the need for relatively high amount of surface, actually the availability of surface is not a major issue, even with very large scale PV diffusion (see 2.4.1). In fact, most PV systems could be installed in buildings, therefore not requiring large amounts of additional space.

Table 4 – BIPV area potential for roofs and areas of selected IEA countries (adapted from Nowak et al., in Eiffert 2003) BIPV area potential

(km2)

Residential

buildings

Agricultural

buildings

Industrial

buildings

Commercial

buildings

Other

buildings

All

buildings

Roof 373.50 22.50 6.00 16.5 3.75 422.25 Australia

Facade 140.06 2.81 2.25 8.25 1.41 158.34

Roof 85.65 17.13 15.19 17.45 4.20 139.62 Austria

Facade 32.12 2.14 5.70 8.73 1.58 52.36

Roof 727.20 36.36 60.60 133.32 6.06 963.54 Canada

Facade 272.70 4.55 22.73 66.66 2.72 361.33

Roof 50.88 14.84 10.60 10.60 1.06 87.98 Denmark

Facade 19.08 1.86 3.98 5.30 0.40 32.99

Roof 78.28 21.01 19.16 8.45 0.41 127.31 Finland

Facade 19.08 1.86 3.98 5.30 0.40 32.99

Roof 721.78 164.04 229.66 164.04 16.40 1295.92 Germany

Facade 270.67 20.51 86.12 82.02 6.15 485.97

Roof 410.26 113.96 136.75 91.17 11.40 763.53 Italy

Facade 153.85 14.25 51.28 45.58 4.27 286.32

Roof 753.88 40.48 75.89 91.07 5.06 966.38 Japan

Facade 282.71 5.06 28.46 45.54 1.90 362.39

Roof 127.48 42.70 52.75 35.80 0.63 259.36 Netherlands

Facade 47.81 5.34 19.78 17.90 0.24 97.26

Roof 251.97 78.74 55.12 55.12 7.87 448.82 Spain

Facade 94.49 9.84 10.67 27.56 2.95 168.31

Roof 134.52 36.11 32.92 14.51 0.71 218.77 Sweden

Facade 50.45 4.51 12.35 7.26 0.27 82.04

Roof 67.12 21.90 21.05 12.80 15.36 138.22 Switzerland

Facade 25.17 2.74 7.89 6.40 5.76 51.83

Roof 601.88 71.09 61.61 168.24 11.85 914.67 United

Kingdom Facade 225.70 8.89 23.10 84.12 4.44 343.00

Roof 6,791.83 322.91 602.76 2260.36 118.40 10096.26 United States

Facade 2,546.94 40.36 226.04 1130.18 44.40 3786.10

As a matter of fact, in recent times very large (>1 MW) building-integrated systems have been built. One of the most recent confirmations of this trend is the decision announced by the Spanish company Telefónica to install a 3 MWp roof in its new industrial complex to be built up in Madrid. The solar park will consist of 16,600 panels which will cover a 21000 m2 roof surface..


11

Visual integration Building integration issues are strongly linked to visual integration ones. During the last years, architects have created award-winning, innovative solar buildings. Currently, very attractive and aesthetically pleasing examples can be found for PV facades, roofs, shadowing elements and other parts of the building. Under an architectural point of view, PV can substitute building components, thus bringing also an economic benefit. In addition, it has a huge multi-function potential for insulation, water proofing, fire protection, wind protection, acoustic control, daylighting, shading, thermal collection and dissipation. Furthermore, it can give an aesthetic touch to the building, by coloured, transparent or non-reflective surfaces. PV also reduces the embodied energy of the building and reduce building maintenance. Innovative techniques (e.g. screen-printing) allow for an extremely high aesthetical value of PV systems. This has been demonstrated by a recent EU project (PVACCEPT 2005), which has lead to the realization of demonstration PV objects in a very sensitive context, i.e. historical monuments in protected tourist areas. Figure 3 shows an example of realized screen-printed CIS modules installed in the castle of La Spezia, Italy. The PV system functions as entrance indication/advertising of the castle museum. Moreover, it supplies enough energy to be illuminated at night with a high-efficiency LED device.

Figure 3 – Aesthetic valorisation of PV – Screen-printed CIS modules - Demonstrative installation in the castle of La Spezia, Italy, realised within the EU-funded PVACCEPT project (2005)

Integration with energy-passive devices

As mentioned, PV systems in architecture can play a multi-functional role. The most obvious example are PV sun-shading systems, which produce electricity and at the same time save energy reducing the need for


12

inside building cooling. However, a series of other integration means of PV with other energy-active (thermal energy recovery) and energy-passive (energy saving) installations in buildings are possible. This is a quite unique feature of PV compared with other energy sources.

Abundance of the primary source Sunlight is the most abundant primary energy source all over the globe and is inexhaustible,. Every hour, more energy from sunlight strikes the Earth than is consumed on the planet in a year. On average worldwide, each square metre of land is exposed to enough sunlight to produce 1,700 kWh of power every year. Yet, today solar electricity provides less than one thousandth of total electricity supply. There is therefore a huge gap between the present use of solar energy and its enormous undeveloped potential.

Figure 4 – Energy potential from PV around the world. Source: G. Czisch, ISET. Retrieved from EPIA (2004)

High social acceptability Finally, many polls carried out in different areas of the world indicate that solar energy proves to be the most successful energy source among the public. As an example, a study commissioned in Italy by the non-governmental associations Kyoto Club and ISES in end-2003 showed that the majority of interviewees (57%) strongly desired solar energy to be mostly exploited by the government in order to meet energy demand. In addition, 89% of citizens would favourably welcome a law which put an obligation to install solar panels in new buildings. The results are in accordance with the outcomes of a Finnish study carried out by the University of Vaasa in February 2002 within the EU project “Green by Demand”: 76.5% of Finnish customers consider the solar energy very green and 94.9% quite or very green. The research also highlighted that a growing number of customers declared a willingness to purchase solar PV cells (20.1%). Another interesting research orientated towards the integration of innovative PV installations in historical buildings in touristic areas was carried out within the EU project PVACCEPT (2001-2004). Surveys were carried out both in Italy and Germany, where the demonstration solar projects had been realized. Among the outcomes of the study, two are of particular interest: - The general acceptance of the PV installations is very high in both countries (in Germany about 98% of

positive feedback was obtained) - The idea of PV on monuments is acceptable for a vast majority of interviewees if the design is adapted.


13

2.2 Driving forces

The key parameters identified and discussed in paragraph 2.1 can be grouped into clusters that need either to be activated (diffusion factors) or overcome (barriers) through a series of policy, industrial, scientific and legislative interventions. The measures which can ensure positive boundary conditions for a rapid and robust diffusion of the PV by removing current obstacles are here referred to as driving forces. The most important ones have been identified as follows: - Favourable regulatory framework - Climate change policy - Decentralised distribution system - Technological and cross-sectorial spillovers - Competitive and dynamic market - Active role of venture capital

In the following paragraphs a brief description of each of these technological and non-technological drivers is given.

2.2.1 Regulatory framework

A clear, stable and favourable regulatory framework is a fundamental pre-requisite for speeding up PV market penetration. Although reliable PV technology is already available today, the cost of electricity is by far the most expensive among the renewable energy sources. Therefore, a dedicated incentive scheme is needed to allow PV to compete with more “mature” technologies, like wind or biomass. Among the support schemes proposed worldwide, feed-in tariffs have proved to be particularly effective with respect to PV capacity expansion. Currently, 16 countries in the EU have adopted a feed-in tariff for the promotion of RES but only few of them have developed appropriate rates specifically for PV (EPIA 2005). The German case is certainly the most successful in Europe. In terms of installed capacity, Germany overtook the USA in 2001 to achieve second position globally behind Japan. Two successive pieces of legislation have been crucially important to this end: - The 100,000 roofs programme of 1999, and - The 2000 Renewable Energy Law (EEG), updated in 2004

Until mid-2003 the 100,000 roofs programme and the premium tariff system operated in parallel. After the ending of the 100,000 roofs programme, the feed-in tariff was revised in 2004 in order to compensate for the fact that low interest loans were no longer available. These new and higher premium feed-in tariffs triggered an even stronger solar electricity boom in Germany. Total new capacity installed during 2004 was 363 MWp, as shown in Figure 5.


14

Figure 5 – PV market expansion (source: EPIA, 2005)

This success story is likely to be replicated also in Italy, where a recent decree has determined the premium to be granted to producers. In the first 2 weeks after the promulgation of the decree, applications for about 100 MW new installations were already received by the Authority. Looking at the growth of PV in different European markets over the past few years, it becomes evident that premium feed-in tariffs are one of the most appropriate tool for creating an eventual self-sustaining solar electricity market. However, whatever route a government may choose towards the envisioned mature market for the RET, it is essential that the policies and the regulatory framework work in the same direction, and that the final destination is clearly signposted. Experience shows that such a broad perspective is often not taken into account when policy packages are designed. In fact, the short term perspective of policies, the lack of consistency between policy fields and levels of authority and the lack of coordination between countries, have formed a major barrier to the implementation of photovoltaics, as well as other renewable energy technologies. On the contrary, if an installed capacity of over 1000 GWp by 2050 is to be achieved, a strategic goal must be set to establish a consistent and far-looking regulatory framework for solar electricity at EU level.

2.2.2 Climate change policy

As other renewable energy technologies, solar PV installations have no emissions during use, thus contributing to avoid the increase of greenhouse gases concentrations in the atmosphere. Estimates from the recent EU research project ECLIPSE (2004) indicate that every kWh of electricity produced from PV panels avoids 90% of life cycle GHG emissions with respect to conventional power mix2. This means that, in principle, PV would be a very good instrument to reduce GHG emissions. However, due to the very limited diffusion of PV so far, PV will practically not contribute at all to the achievement of the Kyoto targets. On the contrary, PV will be able to provide a larget contribution to GHG reduction in the long term. The estimates made by the European Photovoltaic Industry Association indicate that a 282 TWh electricity production by 2020, corresponding to 1.1% of global electricity demand, would allow an annual CO2 saving of about 169 million tonnes. This is why climate change policy is an important driver for the diffusion of PV. The entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol on February 16th 2005, and its combination with the EU Directive on Emissions Trading are expected to give impulse to renewable energy technologies and to strengthen the international cooperation through CDM and JI activities. Currently, however, the introduction of flexible mechanisms has not facilitated the penetration of PV in less developed countries. Actually, no Project Activity

2 Production data are estimated basing on an average Italian insulation reference case and avoided emissions are calculated with respect to the UCPTE power mix. Source: Final report of the EU-funded research project ECLIPSE.


15

has been submitted to the CDM Executive Board, which implied the use of PV. Similarly to the condition observed in the RES-E policy, also in the climate change policy context photovoltaics suffers from the competition of least-cost technology interventions. Under these circumstances, the potential of PV as a unique opportunity to combine climate change mitigation with sustainable economic development remains weakly exploited.

2.2.3 Decentralised distribution system

The electricity network system is more and more shifting from previous centralized production to more decentralized distribution systems. As most PV systems in Europe are building-integrated, distributed generation systems, within this framework, PV offer a set of advantages: - Distribution losses are reduced because the systems are installed at the point of use - Transformation and transmission losses are reduced during peak-power load periods. In fact, in Europe

peak power is increasingly needed in summer at mid-day time. This is precisely when the sun shines and when PV is supplying electricity.

While PV offer a number of advantages to distributed generation, the increasing diffusion of the latter is expected to be an important driving force for PV.

2.2.4 Technological and cross-sectorial spillovers

A spillover effect is generated each time know-how or research results achieved by one firm are used by other firms without the latter having to afford any expenses. PV is a perfect case to be investigated under a spillover-effect approach. Apart from the benefits related to the military and aerospace R&D applications, PV in fact has received important contributions also from the electronic industry. Watanabe (2000, 2003) identifies the central role of cross-sectorial technology spillovers and inter-technology stimulation linking fundamental research and energy technologies, as a driving force for the successful development of new energy technologies (including PV) in Japan. A crucial factor for this development has been MITI3’s Energy R&D policy under the “Sunshine”(launched in 1974) and “New Sunshine” (from 1993) programs. This two latter have de facto stimulated the PV R&D in the industrial sector as a direct consequence of the trigger role in activating cross sectorial technology spillover. MITI, in fact, launched the R&D Sunshine project by putting together over 60 private firms with national research institutes and universities, thus creating a “qualified potential spillover pool linking science and the development of energy technologies” (Watanabe, 2000, 2003). This mechanism has created a virtuous cycle which has ultimately led to an expansion in terms of installed capacity, price decrease of modules and competitive advantage for the Japan PV industry. “Japan shares 45% of world PV market supported by successive decrease in PV prices which can be attributed to an increase in technology stock of PV R&D and a subsequent increase in PV production” (Watanabe, 2003). It is worth highlighting that none of the companies participating in the first “Sunshine” program had previous experience in the PV sector. If we look at the list of the 61 companies involved in the MITI project, the core sectors are distributed as follows: chemicals (15), ceramics (4), iron & steel (7) non-ferrous metals and products (5), machinery (20), public utilities (4), construction (6). Therefore, no direct expertise was retained by any of the firms involved. Nevertheless, three of them, namely Sharp (machinery), Kyocera (ceramics) and Mitsubishi (machinery) are currently the first world PV manufacturers in terms of shipments.

3 The acronym stands for Ministry for International Trade and Industry.


16

From this analysis it can be derived that the mechanism put in place by the Japanese government has led in a few years to the creation of a competitive industry which has benefited from the transfer of knowledge from non-rival sectors. PV is very likely to continue to profit from technology spillovers from several sectors, namely the semiconductor and information technology, the building construction and the materials industry. With respect to the first sector, an insightful example is represented by the Swiss company Unaxis. The company’s displays division has originally bought a PV technology and then transferred that into the field of flat screen display manufacturing. After building their flat screen display business unit for a decade and becoming a very successful supplier of manufacturing equipment for the display industry, they have transferred the technology back to PV and opened a new business unit solar. Other companies like Konarka are trying to promote spillovers from nanotechnology to the development of thin-film solar cells. As far as the building industry is concerned, a large fraction of future PV systems will be integrated in buildings. In order to achieve this, PV modules will have to be transformed in building cladding components. Finally, while today solar cells are encapsulated in tedlar-glass or double glass sheets in the future the use of other innovative high absorption, transparency and stability polymers as encapsulant is envisaged.

2.2.5 Competitive and dynamic market

Competition among the major manufacturers has become increasingly intense, with new players entering the market as the potential for PV opens up. The worldwide photovoltaics industry, particularly in Europe and Japan, is investing heavily in new production facilities and technologies. In addition to spin-offs of well-established big energy corporations like BP solar and Shell, small and dynamic companies have emerged. Evergreen Solar, DayStar Technologies, Energy conversion devices, Spire, Sun Power, are just some example of new, innovative companies whose stocks have almost doubled their value in the Nasdaq during the last year. Evergreen Solar is an insightful example to explain this trend. Founded in 1994, the company manufactures string ribbon wafers and sells solar power panels for rural electrification, on-grid and wireless applications. Looking at the stock quotes and volumes traded in the Nasdaq-NM4 stock exchange during last year, it is possible to see how both stock values and volumes have increased (from less than $ 3 at the end of September 2004 to around $ 9 one year later – peak of volume traded: 9,254,129).

Figure 6 – Quotes and volume traded of Evergreen Solar stocks in the period Oct. 2004-Oct.2005. Source: Nasdaq

4 NM stands for National Market.


17

A competitive and dynamic market is an important driving force to attract investments in the PV sector, which on their turn are expected to lead to cost reduction and very large-scale production.

2.2.6 The role of finance

Investors can play an important role for the commercialisation of innovation in new industries. With this respect, investment funds and venture capital are starting to get increasingly interested in sustainable technologies like PV, thus contributing to market liquidity and sector consolidation. Currently, there are several possibilities to invest in PV companies. As an example, SAM Private Equity offers two different dedicated products which include PV companies: SAM Sustainable Pioneer Fund and SAM Smart Energy Fund. BankInvest New Energy Solutions, MVV Innovationsportfolio, Norsk Hydro Technology Ventures or Nth Power Technologies are other investment funds which currently offer the possibility to support sustainable technologies. Another important role, especially in less-developed countries, is played by microfinance. Microfinance, in fact, helps to overcome the gap between the product price and the customers’ income, which is a main constraint for the PV diffusion in developing countries. As reported by Adib (no date), the average annual per capita income in the developing world is of USD 1,250, and even lower in rural areas. In contrast to this, the price of a solar home system is from USD 500 to USD 1,500 depending on the country, market size, taxes, etc. Thus, only around 3% of potential customers could afford to buy a solar home system on a cash base. The realisation of microfinance projects is proving to be very successful for the development of innovative lending and for diffusing sustainable technologies. In addition, it is characterised by a very low solvency risk. In the future, sustainable energy finance might play a key role as driving force for the diffusion of PV.

2.3 The anticipated role of PV in a future energy supply system

The present paragraph illustrates a possible future envisaged diffusion scenario for PV up to 2050. The pathway is built up according to the most recent roadmaps and technology-specific sources listed in paragraph 2 - Table 2. In particular, an optimistic diffusion scenario is assumed here, in accordance with the “Advanced International Policy” scenario of EREC and the “Aggressive Policies” scenario depicted by NREL and reported in the US PV industry Roadmap. The first one considers a 50% share of renewable energy on total primary energy worldwide by 2040 as feasible if advanced, intelligent and reliable policy measures are implemented in the majority of countries. These include, among others, the full implementation of the Kyoto protocol, the internalisation of external costs of conventional energy, and the ending of subsidies to polluting energy sources. The assumptions for total energy consumption are based on a scenario from IIASA, which is optimistic about technology and geopolitics and assumes unprecedented progressive international cooperation focused explicitly on environmental protection and international equity. According to these assumptions, the AIP scenario indicates that PV could contribute to 6% of world total energy supply and to 25% of electricity supply, by 2040. These results are in line with the analysis of the US PV Industry, which indicate a possible contribution of solar electricity corresponding to approximately 30% of total US supply by 2050. The reported figures are taken as the maximum-achievable target for the PV up to 2050. The underlying hypothesis is that a positive political, economic and institutional framework is established, which activates the clusters (strong points / diffusion factors of PV) by means of the drivers described. More moderate growth rates with respect to the ones here adopted are considered to postpone the meeting of target beyond 2050. Table 5 summarizes the fundamental parameters taken from the various road maps and studies, which are at the basis of the results presented in paragraph 2.3.1. As it is possible to infer, no reference data are


18

available with respect to 2050, with the only exception of the US Roadmap. Projections have been therefore performed according to observed trends in the previous decades, as well as by adapting available scenarios referred to Western Europe of macroeconomic models like Poles and IIASA-WEC 1998. On the basis of the cross-check of the literature references and the estimated total electricity consumption foreseen in the year 2050, a 8% growth rate per year has been adopted for the decade 2040-2050.


19

Table 5 – Overview of the information gathered from the references indicated and used for the development pathway model Parameters 2004 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

PV average yearly growth (%) EPIA: 37%

EPIA: 25-32% EREC(AIP): 28% EREC(DCP): 25%

RWE: 30%

EPIA: 25-32% EREC(AIP): 30% EREC(DCP): 27%

RWE: 25%

EPIA: 15% EREC(AIP): 25% EREC(DCP): 22%

RWE: 25%

EPIA: 15% EREC(AIP): 13,5% EREC(DCP): 15%

NA

PV Market World (GWp/y) BER5: 0.9 EPIA: 3,6 RWE: ca. 3,6

EPIA: 48,6 RWE: 33 RWE: 300 NA NA

PV Market OECD Europe (GWp/y) BER: 0.3 EPIA (calc) 1,1

(31%) EPIA (calc): 8,1

(16%) NA NA NA

PV Installed capacity WO (GWp) EREC (2002): 2.36 NA EPIA: 205

RWE: ca.130 PVTRAC: 1000 RWE: ca.1200 NA NA

PV Installed capacity EU (GWp) BER: 1 EPIA: 4.7 NA PVTRAC: 200 NA NA

PV Electricity prod. WO (TWh) EREC (2001): 2,2 EPIA: 21

EREC(AIP): 20 EPIA: 282

EREC(AIP): 276 EREC: 2570

PVTRAC: 1000 EPIA: 7442

EREC(AIP): 9113 NA

PV Electricity prod. EU (TWh) 1 (calc.) NA NA PVTRAC: 200 NA NA Tot Electricity demand WO (TWh) IEA (2002): 13246 NA EPIA (IEA): 25.578 NA IEA (EREC): 36.346 NA

Tot Electricity demand OECD Europe (TWh) IEA (2002): 2779

WEO2000: 3863 Poles –Ss6.(OECD

EU): 3073 IIASA/WEC- Bs7.

(1998): 3328

WEO2000:4514 Poles –Ss. (OECD

EU): 3599 IIASA/WEC-Bs. (1998): 3867

Poles – Ss. (OECD EU): 4097

IIASA/WEC- Bs. (1998): 4490

NA IIASA/WEC- Bs. (1998): 5392

PV System price (€/Wp) PVTRAC (2004): 5 RWE (2000): 8 PVTRAC: 3-3,5 EPIA: 2

PVTRAC: 2 PVTRAC: 1 PVTRAC: <1 NA

PV Module price (€/Wp) PVTRAC (2004): 3 PVTRAC: 2 PVTRAC: =<1 RWE: 1

PVTRAC: =<0,5 NA NA

PV Electricity cost (€/kWh) 900 kWh/kWp

EPIA (2005): 0,4 PVTRAC (2004)

max): 0,65 RWE (2000): 0,6

EPIA: 0,3 EPIA: 0,19 PVTRAC (max): 0,12 PVTRAC: techn. break-trough NA

PV Electricity cost (€/kWh) 1800 kWh/kWp

EPIA (2005): 0,2 PVTRAC (2004) min:

0,25 RWE (2000): 0,3

EPIA: 0,15 EPIA: 0,1 PVTRAC (min): 0,05 PVTRAC: break-trough tech NA

5 Boletín de Energías Renovables. 6 Ss. = Sapiente scenario. 7 Bs.= B, or Middle course, scenario.


20

2.3.1 What can be reached? Development targets for PV up to 2050

The graph below illustrates the progressive targets to be met in the next decades by PV under a “very optimistic” scenario (see section 2.5.2), i.e. if all the driving forces described in paragraph 2.2 are strong enough to activate the clusters and fully exploit the strong points of PV systems.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

GW

p WorldOECD Europe

Figure 7 – Estimated PV capacity installed up to 2050 both in the OECD Europe and worldwide under a ‘very optimistic scenario’ As illustrated in Table 6 (and as will be discussed in more detail in section 2.5.2), the cumulative PV installed capacity by 2050 can be expected to reach approximately 9 TWp at the world level (over 600 GWp in Europe). The electricity generated could represent about one third of total supply at world level. This scenario is in accordance with the one reported in the US Roadmap. Moreover, intermediate steps at 2010, 2020, 2030 and 2040 are consistent with the envisaged penetration rates of PV described in the other documents analysed. In particular, the latest EREC “Alternative” scenario (EREC, 2007) foresees a quite accelerated yearly growth of PV in the next decades. By 2050, this scenario envisages an electricity production by means of photovoltaics and solar concentrators (CSP technology) of more than 6,000 TWh, corresponding to roughly 20% of total electricity demand at that time8. According to this scenario, solar electricity will be among the largest renewable energy contributors in 2050 (in fact, a close second after wind power). EPIA envisages a similar trend, although characterised by a larger reduction after 2020 (see Table 5). The expected output contained in our “very optimistic” roadmap can be summarised as follows: - Installed capacity: 230 GWp by 2020 - Global solar electricity output: 300 TWh by 2020; 5,400 TWh by 2040 - Total electricity supply share: 1.2% globally by 2020; 15% by 2040

The figures presented in Table 6 appear also consistent with the available surface for BIPV reported in Table 4. That means that in principle the reported goals for the OECD Europe could be achieved without any necessary additional land occupation.

8 The “Alternative“ scenario in EREC (2007) assumes a reduced overall electricity demand worldwide in 2050 with respect to the former estimate made in EREC (2004) for 2040, due to larger efficiency improvements. Also, the share thereof supplied by wind power is assumed to be larger.


21

Table 6 – Envisaged maximum penetration rate for PV in the OECD Europe and worldwide Parameters Area 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Average yearly growth rate

World total 21% 23% 15% 8% 4%

World total 22.5 230 1,270 4,080 8,900 Installed capacity (GWp) OECD Europe 5.9 41 127 326 623 Market share (%) OECD Europe

/ World total 26% 18% 10% 8% 7%

World total 30 300 1,700 5,400 11,800 Electricity production (TWh) OECD Europe 7.8 54 170 430 820

World total 0.2% 1.2% 5.5% 15% 30% Total electricity supply share (%) OECD Europe 0.3% 1.4% 4% 9.5% 15%

An important aspect to be highlighted, however, is related to the need to combine the use of PV for electricity production with other energy sources. As pointed out by EREC (2004), intermittency of PV will not cause any problems to reliable electricity supply until a significant share is reached. In other terms, until 2040 the predicted growth reported in Table 6 should not hamper the reliability of the electricity system. After that period, on the contrary, it is necessary to complement the use of PV with other renewable energy sources that could cover the necessary base-load.

With respect to the envisaged development per market segment, a steady growth is expected in all end-applications. However, grid-connected systems will continue to play a major role, particularly in the OECD Europe. According to the statistics related to OECD European countries provided by IEA-PVPS (2005), in 2004 cumulative grid-connected installed capacity represented 91% of total cumulative installed capacity. This condition is likely to remain dominant in Europe, as a consequence of the support programs established in various countries. On a global scale, grid-connected applications would represent from 50 to 60% of the total market, according to the different data sources investigated.

In the non-industrialised world, a large fraction of installed capacity is expected to be represented by off-grid rural electrification. This would correspond to around 15-20% of total installed capacity worldwide in 2020-2040, and around 10% in 2050. Remote industrial applications are also expected to play an important role, particularly in developing countries. Finally, an increasing percentage of PV-powered consumer applications is expected, as shown in Figure 8.

The results presented are in accordance also with the predicted pathway of Maycock (1999) in Hoffmann (2004), as shown in Figure 9.


22

Figure 8 - Estimated market share per type of applications

Figure 9 – Development prediction for PV market segments (source: Maycock, P.D. 1999, retrieved from Hoffmann, W. 2004) As already mentioned, the bulk of cumulative PV installed capacity in 2050 will be still represented by on-grid applications, particularly in the OECD Europe. Being the focus of the present EU research project on the EU region, our analysis in the following paragraphs will be consequently focussed on grid-connected systems.

2.3.2 Main competitors of PV systems and benchmark technologies

In order to identify main competing and benchmark technologies of PV systems, three aspects have to be taken into account, which are also correlated with each other: - Costs of PV (per Wp installed capacity and per kWh produced electricity) - Projected diffusion and market share - Type and quality of energy service provided

Application Market Share

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2002 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Time interval

Mar

ket S

hare Consumer Application

Off-grid RuralRemote IndustrialGrid Connected


23

Looking at PV module cost reduction in the past, several studies indicate that the Learning Ratio (LR) is around 20%, which means a 20% reduction in price by doubling the cumulative shipment volume9. This is shown in 10, which shows the learning curve of PV modules globally from 1976 to 2001 (PHOTEX 2004). Apart from the slope of the curve, the other issue is the velocity of progress, i.e. the time needed to increase cumulative shipments. In other words, the second important parameter is the Growth Ratio of the market. Market growth and cost reduction depend of course on industry investments. It is worth remembering once more that today PV are economically viable and competitive just for consumer and remote stand-alone applications (roughly 30% of the market in 2004). Grid-connected applications are not competitive. This means that in order to attract investments and ensure growth and progress, PV industry still needs sustained economic incentives and will need them for several years to come. In the past 5 years, the average annual world growth rate was above 40%, making the further increase of production facilities an attractive investment for industry. In 2004 alone it grew by 58,5%, thanks to the exorbitant growth of the German market (+235%) (PV-STATUS 2005).

Figure 10 – Experience curve of PV modules 1976-2001 Source: (PHOTEX 2004, as retrieved in PV-TRAC 2005)

Figure 11 shows forecasts of PV module cost reduction based on different values for progress ratios (PR=1-LR) and market developments (via annual growth rate GR). For example, assuming a LR of 20% and a GR of 20%, the target cost of PV modules at 1 €/Wp is reached around 2030.

9 In many learning curves, the Progress Ratio (PR), i.e. (1-LR) is reported, instead of the Learning Ratio


24

Figure 11 - Forecasts of PV module cost reduction based on different values for progress ratios (PR=1-LR) and market developments (via annual growth rate GR)

However, while 20% as LR might be considered correct and maybe a little optimistic for the future, a GR of 20% is well below the current market growth trend. Hoffmann (2004a) reports that assuming a LR of 15% and a market growth of 30% in the present decade and of 25% from 2010 to 2020 (see Table 5), the 1€/Wp target will be reached in 2020. If the growth rates of EREC-AIP scenario depicted in chapter 2.3.1 are assumed (see Table 5 and Table 6), this target will be reached even before. It is worth recalling that this scenario should be taken as the maximum possible PV market penetration and requires the fulfillment of all described drivers and full exploitation of strong points of PV for its actual implementation. In order to pass from module costs to the costs of PV electricity, both BOS and insolation levels have to be taken into account. By 2020, modules will still represent just 50% of total PV systems costs. As shown in Table 5, total PV system cost including BOS is estimated to be around 2 €/Wp. This corresponds to a cost of electricity ranging from 0,1 to 0,19 €/kWh, respectively for an irradiation level of 900 and 1,800 kWh/(m2*a)10. shows the projected evolution of PV electricity costs and utility prices in function of time for the two mentioned insolation levels (Hoffmann 2004b). As it can be observed from the figure, in Southern Europe PV generation will start to compete with utility peak power already around 2010 (and will be fully competitive by 2020), while in Germany competition is expected to start and develop around 10 years later. In fact, benchmark and competing technologies of PV system in the period 2010-2020 will be those technologies used for peak power production (e.g. turbo-gas and some hydro plants). This is also justified by the fact that peak demand for electricity in European countries occurs more and more in summer at mid-day, driven by air-conditioning in commercial and residential buildings. Finally, competition and benchmark of PV with other peak-power production technologies is also justified by the fact that the maximum market penetration expected for 2020 is just slightly above 1% of total electricity demand (Table 6).

10 Sometimes also referred to as number of equivalent insolation hours per year, or expressed in kWh/kWp


25

Source: Hoffmann (2004b)

Figure 12 – Projected PV electricity costs and benchmark with peak-power and wholesale utility prices A similar reasoning can be made for 2030: According to the estimation reported in Table 6 assuming maximum penetration, by that time PV is expected to cover respectively 6,4% and 8,7% of total electricity supply in Europe and worldwide. This means that by 2030 PV will presumably still provide fully competitive peak-load power and viable mid-load power supply. By that time, PV systems installed in Southern Europe will also start competition with the most expensive base-load electricity production technologies at a price of around 0,05 €/kWh (likely fossil fuels taking into account price increase and externalities). According to EREC-AIP and our maximum penetration scenario, PV is expected to be the first renewable energy contributor by 2040, providing roughly 25% of worldwide total electricity supply. In Europe, we expect a lower penetration rate, due to first saturation effects and lower average insolation levels. It is clear that at such a high level of penetration, PV will provide a substantial mix of peak-,mid- and base-load power, competing with all other energy technologies. In order to ensure this supply and do not create problems to the grid due to the intermittent nature of solar energy, a large share of complementary dispatchable energy technologies will be needed. As mentioned by EREC (2004), a well-balanced mix of different renewable energy sources (containing large portions of dispatchable biomass and hydro) will be the key requirement and solution for a carbon-free energy supply. It is worth remembering that the latest EREC “Alternative” scenario forecasts 70% of total electricity supply from renewables by 2050 (EREC, 2007). According to , PV systems in Southern Europe are expected to be fully competitive in economic terms with respect to competing base-load technologies (while in Central and Northern Europe this will require still more time). However, competition of PV with respect to other technologies by 2040 will not just occur on the basis of economic electricity generation costs, but rather on the full value of the energy service provided. The latter includes quite unique features of PV, in particular of building-integrated PV systems (BIPV) such as:


26

- Building integration - Production on site of consumption - Multi-functional devices - Possible high aesthetical value

With this specific respect, PV has a quite unique position within the whole range of energy technologies. For 2050, extrapolating the EREC-AIP scenario, an extremely high (maximum) share of PV on total electricity supply is expected (50% worldwide, and 30% in Europe). The achievement of such an ambitious target does not just require the full exploitation of all the drivers mentioned before in section 2.2, but it also requires several additional conditions, e.g.: - Rapid diffusion of 3rd generation, break-through ultra-high efficiency PV technologies (see next section) - Availability of affordable storage technologies (e.g. hydrogen) - Full exploitation of all advantages of building integration


27

2.4 The technology development pathway of PV

What technological improvement is needed to reach the above mentioned targets in terms of cost reduction and market diffusion? To what extent will future PV systems differ from those of today? How likely are these technology developments? What are the main key factors influencing the actual implementation of technological change? These issues are briefly illustrated and discussed in the present chapter.

2.4.1 Which technology developments are necessary?

In order to achieve the ambitious targets of market diffusion and cost reduction of PV systems illustrated in chapter 2.3, significant improvement is needed as far as PV module technology is concerned. Moreover, further improvement in terms of BOS, system reliability, maintenance, and overall system performance ratio is necessary as well. As illustrated in chapter 1.3, at present the PV market is dominated by c-Si modules (roughly 90%, including ribbon c-Si). Thin film modules (a-Si, CdTe and CIS/CIGS) account for the rest. Crystalline silicon technology will still be the main technology for many years to come. However, in the long-term (2030 and beyond), it will progressively significantly reduce its market share. In fact, the long-term future PV technology spectrum will be much more differentiated than the one of today. It has to be emphasized, that the different technologies will very likely coexist, even though their efficiencies may be quite different. This is due to the fact that modules with different efficiency and price will serve different market segments and needs. Broadly speaking, PV modules may be classified in three main categories: - Wafer based crystalline silicon (c-Si) - Thin films - New concepts In the following, the main characteristics, expected performance improvements and related technology development needed are shortly described per each category. Wafer based crystalline silicon Present c-Si modules base their success so far on the reliability of the product and production process, on the well-known technology exploiting the experience in the electronics industry and on the availability of feedstock. However, a series of technological developments are needed in order to achieve higher efficiencies, much larger production volumes and the target goal cost of less than 1 €/Wp,. According to PV-TRAC (2005), they are related to Materials, Equipment, and Device concepts and processes, and they include:

“Materials - Availability, quality and price of silicon feedstock (including the development and understanding of solar - grade silicon); - Wafer equivalents for epitaxial cell structure approaches (this also implies reactor development for high-

throughput epitaxial deposition); - Substitution of critical materials, for cost (silver) or environmental (lead, etc.) reasons and design for

recycling.

Equipment - Crystallisation and wafer manufacturing processes (including ribbons) for strongly reduced silicon and

energy use per watt


28

- Development of lower cost, standardised, fully automated process equipment.

Device concepts and processes - Optimisation of processes developed originally for laboratory uses – adaptation to industrial scale; - Process development for thin and/or large area wafers, including low waste processes - Reduction of the energy consumption of processes (including feedstock production) - New module designs for easy assembly, low cost and 25-40 years lifetime - Advanced cell designs and processing schemes for high efficiencies (up to 22% on a cell level, 20% on a

module level)”. According to Hoffmann (2004a), by 2030 single crystalline c-Si based on Czochralsky (Cz) and/or Float zone (Fz) crystal growth will reach an efficiency range of 16%-25%. This is in accordance with the projections of NEDO (2004), reporting a 2030 target module efficiency of 22%. These module types are expected to mainly serve for space and niche market applications requiring high power at a premium price. Less efficient but less costly multi-crystalline and ribbon silicon modules are expected to reach efficiencies of 14-16%, which will ensure large-scale, cost effective power applications (“The PV workhorse”). Starting from 2020, micro-crystalline silicon thin films are expected to diffuse into the market (see also below), thus further augmenting the role of silicon in the total PV market. Thin films At present, thin films modules are dominated by the amorphous silicon (a-Si) technology. Despite their promising potential, a-Si has not proven to reach its original expected target efficiency goals (>10%) needed for large-scale power applications so far. In fact, the projected upper limit of “pure” a-Si module efficiency is just around 12% (Goetzberger 2002). However, according to Hoffmann (2004a), very low-price and low-cost a-Si pin (“Solar electricity glass”) modules will nevertheless meet important market segments, such as large skyscraper facades. In the medium term, an extremely interesting combination of crystalline and thin film technology will appear on the market, i.e. a-Si/μc-Si and thin Si film modules. These devices take advantage of both technologies, e.g. high efficiencies of Si and lower material consumption, larger deposition areas, and eventually monolithic series connection of cells of thin films. The underlying process is a high-temperature chemical vapour deposition (CVD) of silicon to thicknesses on the order of 10 μm on temperature-resistant substrates, like ceramic materials. According to both NEDO (2004) and Hoffmann (2004a), by 2030 such Si thin film modules might reach an efficiency as high as 18%, thus representing viable additional solutions for cost effective power applications. The latter are also represented by the family of II-VI compound thin films, e.g. CdTe and CIS/CIGS. Both technologies have recently proven technological maturity and entered industrial production. In particular, CIS/CIGS modules seem very promising in the short-medium term, since they combine all main advantages of thin films with interestingly high efficiency (around 11% in 2005, with a significant potential for improvement). CdTe module efficiencies are around 2% lower, but also with lower production costs. NEDO (2004) reports a target module efficiency of 22% for CIS modules in 2030. However, some concern does exist related to material availability (with specific respect to indium and tellurium), which might limit a very large diffusion of these technologies in the very long-term (Hoffmann 2004a). As far as this very long-term horizon is concerned, it is therefore expected that thin films will play a significant role in the PV market (equal or above 1/3 of the total amount of sales, see also below), although it is not fully clear, which specific technology will prevail after 2030. PV-TRAC (2005) identifies the following main research areas for full implementation and exploitation of thin film targets:


29

“Materials and devices - Increase of module efficiencies from the current 5-12% to >15% - Understanding of fundamental properties of materials and devices, especially interfaces - Development of new multi-junction structures - Development of low-cost, high-per formance TCO materials for thin-film cell designs - Reduced materials consumption (layer thickness and yield), use of low cost, low-grade materials - Reduction or avoidance of the use of critical materials, substitution of scarce or hazardous materials and

recycling options - Alternative module concepts (new substrates and encapsulation) - Ensuring stable module operation for 20 to 30 years with less than 10% efficiency decrease.

Processes and equipment - Development of processes and equipment for high yield, low-cost, large-area manufacturing - Ensure the uniformity of film properties over large areas and understand the efficiency gap between

laboratory cells and large area modules - Increase stability of the process and yield - Development of process monitoring - Adopt successful techniques to industrial conditions in view of productivity and labour - Reduction of energy pay-back-time of modules (from present 1.5 years to 0.5 years for central European

climatic conditions).” New concept devices This category of future PV technologies can be further subdivided in two main areas: - Ultra-low cost, low-medium efficiency cells and modules - Ultra-high efficiency cells and modules In the first area, the technology closest to a transfer to pilot production is the dye-sensitized nanocrystalline solar cell concept, which has shown an efficiency of 10,5% in laboratory (NEDO 2004). According to Hoffmann (2004a) these “Colour to PV” modules might reach an 10% efficiency by 2030. Japanese are more optimistic, forecasting this objective to be reached already by 2020. NEDO (2004) reports a target efficiency of 15% for DSC modules by 2030. In the same area, organic solar cells have been recently invented at efficiencies around 2% (Grätzel 2000). While it is too premature to make any reasonable prediction with regard to the role of these cells in the future PV market, it can be said that they represent the “low-cost option” for special applications, which do not have space problems. The second area comprises a set of futuristic technologies, sometimes referred to as “3rd generation” PV cells, utilizing advanced concepts of solid-state matter physics, such as hot electrons, multiple quantum wells, intermediate band gap structures and nanostructures. While the theoretical limit of these cells is dramatically higher than the one of conventional cells, it is of course very difficult to predict the efficiency range that will be actually reached in industrial production. PV-TRAC (2005) reports that PV modules may ultimately reach efficiencies of 30%-50%. Hoffmann (2004a) speaks of modules aiming at an extra-high efficiency range of 30%-60%, while Goetzberger (2002) predicts an upper limit of 42% (Figure 13). These new concepts are still in the fundamental research stages. Reaching the projected targets still requires a thorough understanding of the underlying chemistry, physics and materials properties. Strategic research ares identified by PV-TRAC (2005) include:


30

“Organically sensitised cells and modules: - Stability (from months or a few years (estimated) to >10 years) - Efficiency (from 5 to 10% for modules) - Fully solid state devices.

Inorganically sensitised cells (extremely thin absorber cells), ETA - Efficiency (from very low to 5-10%).

Other nanostructured devices with potential for very low cost - Efficiency (from very low to 5-10%).

Polymer and molecular solar cells - Efficiency (from 3-5 to 10%) - Stability (from very low to >10 years) Development of stable, high-quality transparent conductor and encapsulant materials

Novel conversion concepts for super-high efficiency and full spectrum utilisation - Spectrum conversion - Multi-band semiconductors - Hot-carrier devices.” An overview of the expected improvement in PV cell efficiencies until 2050 according to Goeztberger (2002) is shown in Figure 13. The graph reports the result of a mathematical simulation based on historical cell conversion efficiency data. The results are well in accordance with the data reported by the various PV roadmaps mentioned and discussed above. The expected module efficiencies are generally 2%-5% lower than cell efficiencies reported in the figure.

Figure 13 – Forecasted PV cell efficiency improvements for various technologies (Source: Goetzberger 2002)


31

Figure 14 shows an additional information, i.e. the evolution of both module efficiencies and prices in function of time until 2020 (Hoffmann 2004b). Data for all the tree main categories wafer-based c-Si, thin films and novel (low-cost) devices are shown. Since the time scope is limited to 2020, ultra-high efficiency modules expected to be developed afterwards are not taken into account.

Figure 14 – Module Price and Efficiency for various PV technologies in function of time [source: Hoffmann (2004b)]

2.4.2 How likely are these technology developments?

Requirements and driving forces for a possible diffusion of PV systems in Europe In chapter 2.3 a very optimistic, albeit reasonable and feasible, diffusion scenario for PV worldwide and in Europe has been presented, based on available recent literature and trends. As already mentioned, this is our estimate for the absolute maximum possible penetration of PV by 2050. It is worth noticing that scenarios are images of alternative future options. Scenarios are neither prediction nor forecasts. In particular, the depicted scenario needs several conditions for its full implementation, i.e. the driving forces mentioned in chapter 2.2 exploiting the strong points/diffusion factors of PV. If these requirements are not satisfied, its ambitious targets will be achieved much later. Under certain circumstances, they might even eventually be never reached. This is particularly important in the European context, where grid-connected applications are at present and are expected to remain by far the main utilization of PV systems. Unlike remote systems, grid-connected applications are still far from economic competitiveness. In Europe more than in other world regions, this implies that PV diffusion is going to be dependent on economic support from society for several years to


32

come. In fact, while profiting from the world market growth in already competitive segments, it is clear that large-scale PV diffusion in Europe will only occur, if a steady growth of grid-connected, probably mostly building-integrated, PV systems is guaranteed by sustained market deployment incentives. The latter are going to attract the necessary investments needed to accomplish both large-scale production and cost reduction. In order the latter to be fully achieved, a combination of appropriate R&D funding with market deployment incentives is also needed. From a techno-economic point of view, three broad main phases for the diffusion of PV systems in Europe: - A pre-competitive phase - A phase in which PV will be competitive with peak-power - A phase in which PV will be competitive with base-load electricity production. As described in section 2.3.1 (in particular Table 6 and ), the first phase is expected to last until 2010-2020. It is of paramount importance for future diffusion of PV, that sustained and long-term oriented economic support is granted to PV industry in all this first pre-competitive phase. Without this, all the later diffusion scenarios might be partly or totally at risk. It is also important to grant appropriate R&D funding, to cope with present technology issues and allow for long-term technological shifts (see more details below). If the mentioned requirements are satisfied, by 2010-2020 PV is expected to reach a penetration rate of 0,1%-1% on the total electricity production system (Table 6). Depending on their geographical location, PV systems are expected to become partly or fully competitive with other peak-power technologies (). This might open a first phase of market-driven diffusion of PV, as commercial investors may find a strong interest in investing in PV systems as economically viable option for peak-power production. Given the other benefits of PV (e.g. building-integration, multi-functional devices, high social acceptance, etc.), PV might well be the preferred option in many cases. Given the fact that by 2020 PV systems are expected to represent at maximum 1% of total electricity supply, the potential market-driven growth of PV in this phase is significant (proportional to the total size of peak-power electricity production). Market deployment incentives will be less important (or may eventually disappear) during this second phase. On the contrary, appropriate R&D funding will be needed in order to foster the technological shift toward 3rd generation devices (see below). If the above described evolution actually occurs, PV systems installed in Southern Europe will start to be competitive with other base-load technologies starting from 2025-2030 (). This will open a second, large-scale phase of market-driven PV diffusion, which may eventually lead PV from niche-market to mass-market production. Under favourable conditions, some time after 2030 PV will probably have reached a “critical mass” of 10% of electricity market share. At this stage, not just economic factors, but also other key driving forces may lead further diffusion of PV, e.g: - Climate change policy - Decentralized distribution system with demand-side management - Technological and cross-sectoral spillovers - Competitive and dynamic market - The role of sustainable energy finance In this phase, PV is expected to fully exploits its strong points, e.g. building-integration, possible high aesthetical value, multi-functional devices and very high social acceptance. Public support will likely be limited to basic and applied R&D funding, aiming at the full implementation and exploitation of 3rd generation, ultra-high efficiency and/or ultra-low cost technologies.


33

At a very high diffusion level eventually to be reached by 2050 (equal or above 30% of electricity supply), the availability and affordability of energy storage systems (e.g. hydrogen), as well of total energy management systems and appropriate mix of back-up dispatchable energy sources (renewable or not), will be key for implementation and further diffusion.

2.4.3 Specification of future PV systems in 2050

Modules As mentioned in the previous chapters, by 2050 a mix of different PV technologies will likely coexist, each with different technical properties and applications. As already stated, they can be classified in three broad categories, i.e: - Crystalline silicon based technology - Thin films - New concept devices The foreseen specification and performance of these PV technologies is summarized in Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden.. BOS In order to meet system price targets and to ensure the highest possible performance ratios, research on BOS issues is also very important. Since BOS corresponds today to 40%-50% of total costs, significant cost reductions are needed also in this area. By 2050, the following strategic research implementation area targets will have to be achieved (PV-TRAC 2005):

“Power conditioning and interconnection - Inverter design and manufacturing concepts aimed at low cost (0,25 €/W) combined with excellent

reliability and long lifetime (20 years+) - Innovative module-integrated electronics for power conditioning, monitoring and control - Design of multifunctional low-cost grid interfaces to ensure safe and reliable system operation.

Grid integration aspects - New concepts for stability and control of electrical grids at high penetration levels of PV to ensure that

networks are operated effectively and economically - Control and communication strategies and interfaces for PV systems, including energy storage - Development of power electronics to improve power quality at high penetration levels of PV - Interactive energy management systems for optimisation of the value of PV electricity in grid-connected

systems (including supply/demand matching).

Building integration Areas to be addressed by 2050 concern the following aspects: With regard to building integration and mechanical mounting of modules - Options for reduced materials and labour costs - Options for increased installation safety, easy repair and replacement With respect to combination and integration of functions - PV shading systems, hybrid PV/thermal systems, integration with ventilation, etc. - Total energy concepts” (PV-TRAC 2005)


34

Wafer-based c-Si Thin films New concept devices

Cz, Fz mc, ribbon CIS, CdTe

a-Si/μc-Si

thin Si films

Pin-ASI and

ASI-THRU

Ultra-high efficiency(3rd generation, Quantum wells Nanostructures Concentrators)

Ultra-low cost (Dye-sensitized cells

Organic cells)

Module eff (%) 24%-28% (PV-TRAC: around 24% in

2030)

20%-25% (EPIA: 18% in 2020)

CIS: 22%-25% (NEDO: 22% in 2030)

Si: (NEDO: 18% in 2030)

6-8% (RWE: 4-6% in 2030)

> 40% (target: 30%-60%)

10%-17% (NEDO: 15% in 2030 PVTRAC: 5%-10%)

Module lifetime (years)

40y - 50 y (PV-TRAC: 40y in 2030)

40y - 50 y (PV-TRAC: 40y in 2030)

30y-35y (NEDO: 30y in 2030)

30y >25y 10-15 y (PVTRAC: >10y in 2030)

Annual el prod (900 kWh/m2*y)

194-227 kWhel/m2*y 162-203 kWhel/m2*y 178-203 kWhel/m2*y 49-65 kWhel/m2*y 324-405 kWhel/m2*y 81-138 kWhel/m2*y

Annual el prod (1800 kWh/m2*y)

389-454 kWhel/m2*y 324-405 kWhel/m2*y 356-405 kWhel/m2*y 97-130 kWhel/m2*y 648-810 kWhel/m2*y 162-275 kWhel/m2*y

Provided service High power at premium price

Cost-effective power applications

Additional solutions for cost effective power

applications

Low cost / low eff ”Solar electricity glass”

High power supply “Colour to PV” ”Low material cost option”

Market segment Niche markets, space Mass market (“The PV workhorse)

Mass market Mass market Niche market / mass market

Mass market

Applications All applications with surface constraints (e.g.

specific BIPV)

Ground-mounted, very large-scale PV

All All Special added value in

BIPV (e.g. semi-transparency, screen-

printing, etc.)

Consumer products Special applications

Large surface buildings

All applications with surface constraints

Ground-mounted, very large-scale PV

All

Table 7 – Foreseen specification of PV systems in 2050


35

2.5 PV Technology Road Maps

By combining the trends illustrated in the former sections with additional available information from the literature, it is possible to draft alternative scenarios, or “Technology Road Maps”, depicting an estimate of the technological improvements, technological shifts and consequent diffusion on the market of the various PV technologies in the next decades.

For the first period till 2010, all the scenarios essentially coincide in making the same projections, since the foreseeable development of the different PV technologies within this limited time span is largely based on the current technical state of the art, as well as on the present availability of economic subsidies.

Forecasts for the following decades are increasingly hard to make, and we have no choice but to resort to relying on alternative scenarios characterized by varying degrees of optimism.

For instance, according to PV-NET (2004), the growing trend in thin film PV is expected to continue until 2020. At that time wafer-based c-Si, silicon thin films and other thin films will account respectively for 50%, 30% and 15% of the PV market. By then, the start-up of new concept devices will become visible (5%). According to Hoffmann (2004a), by 2030 c-Si will further reduce its relative share down to 30%11. Hoffmann (2004a) makes no more distinction between different types of thin films, which are expected to account for 35% of the market, the same as new concept modules.

For the last period 2040-50, no forecasts on technology market shares exist in literature. There seems to be a consensus among several road maps that it will be in these two decades that the rise of the new concept devices will take place. However, the latter are not likely to fully substitute c-Si and thin films. Rather, there is consensus that a mix of technologies will continue to exist, because different technologies with different characteristics will serve different applications and needs.

Based on all the aforementioned information and considerations, we were able to make some short-term predictions for the development of PV till the year 2010, and then to draft three longer-term Road Maps extending till the year 2050. It is important to highlight that the long-term diffusion of the different technologies does not only depend on the achievable module efficiencies, but more importantly, also on the maturity of each technology in terms of its degree of industrialization, module manufacturing costs, energy pay-back times, additional area-related BOS costs, and even raw material reserves. Last but not least, if PV is ever to provide more than approximately 10% of the total electricity supply, the co-evolution of a suitable storage system is also a mandatory requisite, because of the intrinsic fluctuations in PV power output.

2.5.1 Short-term projections till 2010

As illustrated in chapter 1, the present PV market is dominated by c-Si modules (> 90%). Both sc-Si and mc-Si technologies derive from the electronic industry process, based on the production of silicon ingots, which are then cut into wafers. These technologies have the main drawback that a high amount (about 50%) of raw material is lost during the wire sawing of the wafers from the block. This low material efficiency has important implications in terms of costs, since materials represent at present roughly 60% of the total cost of c-Si modules. It also has important energy/environmental implications, as all upstream phases (e.g. energy consumption in the feedstock and ingot production) strongly influence total energy consumption, leading to the present relatively high energy pay-back times (around 3-4 years). The industry is following two routes to tackle this issue. The first is to look for viable internal recycling of saw dust, thus increasing net material efficiency. The second is the technological shift toward so called

11 It is worth noticing, that due to the exponential growth of the market, this means an absolute increase by more than 6 times with respect to 2020 anyway.


36

ribbon technologies, e.g. the edge defined film fed growth (EFG). EFG wafer production has a material efficiency of around 90%. Ribbon technologies are expected to steadily increase their relevance within c-Si technologies. Another very important issue for the c-Si industry is the feedstock availability. Already today, off-spec silicon from electronic industry is supplying less than 50% of PV industry demand. The rest is provided by dedicated poly-Si production. In the future however, feedstock demand is expected to raise exponentially. Several companies are exploring alternative ways of direct purification of metallurgic-grade silicon into solar-grade silicon (SoG-Si). A concerted effort sustained by public and private R&D funding for the production of large-scale affordable quality and price SoG-Si is a short-term strategic applied research at European and worldwide level (PV-TRAC 2005). If this effort is not successful, the missing availability of SoG-Si may eventually hamper the cost reduction potential of c-Si technologies in the medium term. For these and other reasons, PV is increasingly looking at thin films as a short-medium term alternative to c-Si technology. Indeed, several advantages of thin films will certainly stimulate a continued development of the thin-film technologies in the short-medium term. These advantages include: - Very low materials consumption per m2; - Large-area deposition; - Automated monolithic series connection of cells (e.g. laser scribing): - Lower energy consumption and shorter energy pay-back times; - Potential for lower module manufacturing costs. According to PV-NET (2004), the relative share of c-Si modules will shrink from over 90% to 84% by 2010. In the same time interval, thin films will increase their share up to 15%. Of the latter, 2/3 will come from silicon (a-Si and a-Si/μc-Si) and the remaining 1/3 from other thin films (e.g. CIS and CdTe). Figure 15 summarizes the expected evolution of the different PV technologies in absolute terms of installed capacity worldwide by 2010.


37

Cumulative installed capacity

0

5

10

15

20

25

Present (2006) 2010

Year

GW

p

Other Thin Films

a-Si Thin Films

c-Si

Figure 15 – Expected diffusion of different PV technologies until 2010

2.5.2 Road Map n.1 – “Very Optimistic / Technological Breakthrough” scenario

In this first Road Map, bold annual growth rates are assumed from as early as 2010, and the trend is expected to keep growing in a quadratic fashion all the way through, topping out at almost 9,000 GWp in 2050. What this growth scenario implies is that by the mid-2030’s at the latest a large-scale energy storage infrastructure will have to have been developed. One option that is currently being considered in this sense is represented by electrolytically produced hydrogen gas. The latter could be used as an energy buffer whereby to store the surplus energy generated by PV systems during peak irradiation hours, only to be converted back to electricity by means of fuel cell devices when the need arises. Other available energy storage options are pumped hydroelectric and compressed air energy storage (CAES); however, both are dependent on the local availability of natural geologic formations (respectively altitude drops for the former and naturally occurring aquifers, solution-mined salt caverns and constructed rock caverns for the latter). Last but not least, progress is being made in the development of efficient high-speed flywheel systems whereby electric energy is converted into kinetic energy in a cylindrical or ringed mass, levitated by magnets and spinning at very high speeds (~10,000-20,000 rpm) in a vacuum chamber. As already underlined before, integrated PV-storage systems such as these will be mandatory in order to warrant the necessary stability of the network if PV is ever to provide more than 10% of the total electricity supply.

As far as the relative penetration of the three different types of technologies is concerned, this scenario is dominated by the predicted very rapid expansion of PV systems based on novel technologies after 2025 (following what can be referred to as a major “technological breakthrough”). These novel technologies are expected to grow as much as to eventually account for approximately 50% of the total PV market in 2050 (Figure 16). In fact, it can be argued that the shift itself from a still limited share of total electricity production (3%) in 2025 to a very large diffusion of PV as a whole in 2050 (largest contributor among


38

renewable energy technologies; 35% of total electricity production) heavily depends on the realization and diffusion of such new concept PV devices.

Once again, it is important to stress that this can only happen if adequate strategic research is funded in the period from today until 2025. If this requirement is not fulfilled and appropriate and affordable storage and energy load management instruments are not available, the installed capacity figures reported in Table 8 are not likely to be reached.

Figure 16 – Forecasted PV technology market share Also the expected comparatively large increases in the efficiencies and lifetimes for all technologies reflect a large R&D effort from the industry side, which in its turn is also tightly linked to marked penetration issues.

The key predictions of Road Map n.1 are summarized in Table 8.

PV Technology Market Share

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2003 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Year

Mar

ket S

hare

Novel DevicesOther Thin Films Thin Films Silicon Thin Films Crystalline Si


39

Present Year 2025 Year 2050 Cumulative installed capacity (GWp)

3 570 8,900

Crystalline Si Thin films Crystalline Si Thin films Novel dev. Crystalline Si Thin films Novel dev. Technology

sc-Si mc-Si ribbon

-Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

sc-Si mc-Si ribbon

-Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC(e)

UHE (f) sc-Si mc-Si

ribbon-Si

a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC (e)

UHE (f)

% Avg. module efficiency

14 13 11 10 10 (c)

9 (d) 22 20

20 (a)

12 (b) 15 20 (c)

18 (d) 10 35 28 25

25 (a)

16 (b) 20

25 (c)

22 (d) 17 50

Module lifetime (yrs)

25 25 35 30 10 30 50 40 15 45

Cumulative installed capacity (GWp)

2.7 0.3 290 260 20 1300 3100 4500

% Share of PV market

90 10 50 45 5 15 35 50

Table 8 – PV Road Map n.1 - “Very Optimistic / Technological Breakthrough” scenario (a) thick (150 - 100 μm) Silicon layer; (b) thin (100 - 50 μm) Silicon layer; (c) Copper Indium di-Selenide; (d) Cadmium Telluride; (e) Dye Sensitized Cells (low cost devices); (f) Ultra-High-Efficiency devices (solar concentrators and quantum cells)


40

2.5.3 Road Map n.2 - “Optimistic / Realistic” scenario

In this scenario, we assumed that the predictions for the growth of the world PV market made by the Eurpoean Photovoltaic Industry Association together with Greenpeace in their latest Solar Generation Report (EPIA, 2006) will be valid all the way through to 2025, when the annual installed capacity is expected to reach 55 GWp. After that date, we assumed a transition to a less steep annual growth rate, eventually leading to a linear trend, whereby the cumulative installed capacity will keep growing steadily, approximately doubling each decade to eventually reach 2,400 GWp in 2050. This latter assumption is in good accordance with the predictions made in the latest report by the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC, 2007).

As far as the three different “families” of PV technologies are concerned (i.e. crystalline Si, thin films and novel devices), as already stated in sections 2.4.3 and 2.5, they will likely co-exist all the way through, each expanding especially within its own most suitable market sector. What is largely foreseeable is that thin film technologies will be the first to expand, growing from 10% share of the market (the largest part of which is currently made up by amorphous Si) to approximately 45% thereof by 2025, with larger contributions by CIS and CdTe.

The timing for the expansion of the novel devices is of course harder to predict. Hoffmann (2004a) predicts a large market share of 35% for these technologies as early as 2030. However, we regard this to be a little too optimistic; therefore, in our market share scenario for 2025, we kept the novel devices at a more cautious 5%, putting off their expansion to 30% of the market share to 2050. We believe that this is more in line with current and projected R&D developments and with the time gap needed to move from laboratory research to mass production. However any long-term scenario is of course affected by a large degree of uncertainty. If a technological break-through in new concept technology already occurs in the period 2010-2020, this will obviously anticipate the diffusion of such PV devices.



41


3 430 2400


sc-Si mc-Si ribbon

-Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

sc-Si mc-Si ribbon

-Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC (e)

UHE (f) sc-Si mc-Si

ribbon-Si

a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC (e)

UHE (f)


14 13 11 10 10 (c)

9 (d) 22 20

20 (a)

12 (b) 15 20 (c)

18 (d) 10 35 25 22

22 (a)

14 (b) 18

25 (c)

22 (d) 15 40


25 25 35 30 10 30 40 35 10 35


2.7 0.3 220 190 20 720 840 840


90 10 50 45 5 30 35 35

Table 9 – PV Road Map n.2 - “Optimistic / Realistic” scenario (a) thick (150 - 100 μm) Silicon layer; (b) thin (100 - 50 μm) Silicon layer; (c) Copper Indium di-Selenide; (d) Cadmium Telluride; (e) Dye Sensitized Cells (low cost devices); (f) Ultra-High-Efficiency devices (solar concentrators and quantum cells)


42

2.5.4 Road Map n.3 – “Pessimistic” scenario

This last Road Map essentially mirrors the “best case” scenario drafted by IEA and OECD in their “Energy Technology Perspectives 2006” report (IEA/OECD, 2006). In this scenario, it is assumed that PV will at best cumulatively account for approximately 2% of the overall world electricity supply by 2050 (the latter being estimated by IEA at 35,000 TWh/a). If we assume an average irradiation of 1,400 kWh/(m2*a), implying that approximately 60% of the PV systems will be located in high-irradiation (i.e. 1,800 kWh/(m2*a)) Southern countries by 2050, and an improved average Performance Factor of 0.95, we obtain a cumulative installed capacity of approximately 530 GWp in 2050.

This comparatively more pessimistic scenario essentially corresponds to assuming that the current incentives for PV will not be supported long enough for the technology to ever become competitive with bulk electricity. In fact, according to the simulation made for this Road Map, the growth of the overall world PV market will only be in accordance with the predictions made in EPIA’s Solar Generation report till 2010 (since it is unlikely that those countries that are presently leading the pack in the world PV market race would pull the plug any earlier than that), while it will already be severely stunted by 2025, when the cumulative installed capacity will start levelling off at 165 GWp (vs. 433 GWp in Road Map n.2).

Of course, the predicted relative shares of the different PV technologies in this Road Map also reflect the different assumptions discussed above. More specifically, a much slower growth is foreseen for thin film PV, the market share of which only increases, in this scenario, to 15% in 2025, to then eventually reach 45% no sooner than 2050. In parallel, the gains in module efficiency are also much slower, with both c-Si and thin films struggling to improve significantly upon their current levels of performance by 2025, and eventually only reaching 18% efficiency by 2050. Of course, this prediction reflects the lower R&D funds likely to be invested in these technologies in the event that they are not supported long enough for them to become economically competitive on a large scale.

The market penetration of the novel technologies is also postponed to a much later time in this scenario, and even by 2050 they are only foreseen to account for a very small percentage of the total cumulative installed power, essentially reflecting a limited application of these new devices to niche market products.



43


3 170 530


sc-Si mc-Si ribbon-

Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

sc-Si mc-Siribbon-

Si a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC (e)

UHE (f) sc-Si mc-Si

ribbon-Si

a-Si

CIS/ CdTe

DSC (e)

UHE (f)


14 13 11 10 10 (c)

9 (d) 17 14

14 (a)

12 (b) 10 14 (c)

12 (d) N/A N/A 22 18

18 (a)

12 (b) 15

18 (c)

16 (d) 10 35


25 25 30 25 N/A N/A 35 30 10 30


2.7 0.3 140 30 0 270 240 20


90 10 85 15 0 50 45 5

Table 10 – PV Road Map n.3 - “Pessimistic” scenario (a) thick (150 - 100 μm) Silicon layer; (b) thin (100 - 50 μm) Silicon layer; (c) Copper Indium di-Selenide; (d) Cadmium Telluride; (e) Dye Sensitized Cells (low cost devices); (f) Ultra-High-Efficiency devices (solar concentrators and quantum cells)


44

2.5.5 Comparison of the three Road Maps and associated PV cost reductions

First of all, it is of crucial importance to stress that in no case can accurate predictions of what will happen in the world in three to five decades be made. The three PV Road Maps illustrated in sections 2.5.2 – 2.5.4 should all be interpreted as possible alternative scenarios, each one of which reflects different assumptions on what might come about in the next forty years.

In particular, Road Map n.1 can be regarded as “very optimistic” in that it simultaneously assumes that:

(a) the current economic incentives to PV will be maintained for as long as it will be necessary for the different technologies to become economically competitive on the bulk electricity market;

(b) technological research will rapidly succeed in bringing out viable new technologies capable of producing on the one side ultra-low cost PV systems for a wide range of low-end applications and on the other side ultra-high efficiency devices for more upmarket sectors;

(c) a transition will take place over the next two to three decades to an altogether different electricity network which will largely depend on distributed power generation (such as that provided by building-integrated PV) rather than on the current large centralised power plants;

and, finally,

(d) a full-blown energy storage infrastructure (likely based on hydrogen) will have been developed by as early as the mid 2030’s to cope with a growing share of bulk electricity being supplied by inherently fluctuating renewables such as PV.

Road Map n.2 shares many of these same assumptions, but relaxes the time schedule according to which the aforementioned changes are expected to take place, and does not imply as substantial a shift to distributed power generation. As a consequence, it can be regarded as a “mildly optimistic” or “realistic” scenario among those being considered here.

Road Map n.3 differs sharply from the former two, since it is strictly based on an economic growth model, and, as already explained in section 2.5.4, does not assume that the subsidies that would be necessary for PV to eventually become competitive on the bulk electricity market will be kept up in the long run. Of course, this has implications on both the technological level, resulting in severely curbed R&D, as well as on the infrastructure level, which of course is left with fewer reasons to change according to the needs of a technology that does not really seem to cut it. All these considerations of course make this the most “pessimistic” scenario of the three.

Last but not least, of course, for the sake of completeness, one should also consider the “business as usual” scenario, in which essentially no progress is made in PV technology with respect to the level at which it is today, because of a sudden shortage of economic subsidies and consequently R&D funding. Even as this remains one possible alternative for the future of PV, we decided not to include it in our comparison, since it would in all respects correspond to the market “death” of PV, which would only survive as a niche product for highly specialized applications, and would never make a visible dent into the global bulk electricity market.

Tables 11 to 13 summarize the different projections of PV market growth in terms of installed capacity and electricity production according to the three Road Maps. It is interesting to highlight how the key parameter differentiating the three scenarios is the assumed yearly percentage growth rate (column three).


45

Year Yearly installed

capacity (GWp)

Avg. % annual market growth rate


(GWp)

Total annual electricity

production (TWh) 2006 1.9 34% 6.4 6 2010 5.6 21% 22.5 23 2020 44.5 23% 230 290 2025 89 15% 575 720 2030 180 15% 1,270 1,600 2040 388 8% 4,080 5,800 2050 575 4% 8,930 12,700

Table 11 – PV market growth according to the Road Map n. 1 - “Very Optimistic / Technological Breakthrough” scenario


capacity (GWp)



(GWp)


production (TWh) 2006 1.9 34% 6.4 6 2010 5.6 21% 22.5 23 2020 34 19% 206 260 2025 55 11% 434 550 2030 71 5% 755 950 2040 82 1.5% 1,520 2,170 2050 86 0.5% 2,360 3,400

Table 12 – PV market growth according to the Road Map n. 2 - “Optimistic / Realistic” scenario


capacity (GWp)



(GWp)


production (TWh) 2006 1.9 34% 6.4 6 2010 5.6 21% 22.5 23 2020 11 7% 105 130 2025 13 3% 166 210 2030 15 3% 236 300 2040 15 0% 384 550 2050 15 0% 532 760

Table 13 – PV market growth according to the Road Map n.3 - “Pessimistic” scenario

In Figure 17 the expected growth of the world PV market according to the three Road Maps discussed in this chapter is then graphed.


46

Figure 17 – PV world cumulative installed capacity according to the three scenarios.

The future average price of grid-connected PV systems is of course tightly linked to the evolution of the market share discussed above.

Since the historical data for the last two decades indicate a fairly constant Learning Rate for PV systems at 20%, it is assumed in all three scenarios that this value will be maintained for all PV components at least to 2010. Different assumptions are then made from 2011 onwards, assuming specific Learning Rates for the various PV components. The assumptions made for the purposes of estimating PV costs all the way to 2050 according to the three Road Maps are summarized below:

ROAD MAP n.1 (Very Optimistic):

- Fixed Learning rate for PV modules = 20% (the assumption of such a sustained LR is consistent with the foreseen market penetration of thin films after 2010, and then with the major technological shift to third generation devices after 2025);

- Variable Learning rate for Electrical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 10% from 2011 ;

- Variable Learning rate for Mechanical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 10% from 2011 ;

- Variable allocation of Mechanical BOS to PV for Building Integrated PV: 100% until 2010, then -2% each year to 20% in 2050 (BIPV will become more and more a standard component of buildings, and therefore a larger and larger share of the costs of the associated mechanical structure is to be attributed to the buildings themselves).

ROAD MAP n.2 (Optimistic / Realistic):

- Fixed Learning rate for PV modules = 20% (the assumption of such a sustained LR is consistent with the foreseen market penetration of thin films after 2010, and then with the major technological shift to third generation devices after 2025);

- Variable Learning rate for Electrical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 10% 2011-2025 / 5% after 2025;

- Variable Learning rate for Mechanical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 10% from 2011;

- Variable allocation of Mechanical BOS to PV for BIPV: 100% until 2010, then -1% each year to 85% in 2025; fixed at 85% afterwards (like in road map n.2, PV will become more and more a standard

World cumulative installed capacity

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

GW

p

Pessimistic Optimistic / Realistic V. Optimistic / Techn. Breakthrough


47

component of buildings, however the sheer bulk of the installations will be inferior, hence the more limited reduction of the allocation factors).

ROAD MAP n.3 (Pessimistic):

- Fixed Learning rate for PV modules = 20% / 10% after 2025 (in this scenario there will be little to no market penetration of third generation devices, hence the reduced LR after 2025);

- Variable Learning rate for Electrical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 5% from 2011;

- Variable Learning rate for Mechanical BOS = 20% until 2010 / 10% from 2011;

- Fixed allocation of Mechanical BOS to PV for BIPV = 100% (in this road map PV systems will essentially remain after-market add-on devices, and therefore their entire mechanical BOS will remain allocated to them).

Figures 18 and 19 show the results of these calculations for the three PV Road Maps, respectively for Power Plant-size and Building Integrated installations.

Figure 18 – Average cost of Power Plant size PV according to the three scenarios.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050

Year

€/W

p


2030: 1 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2040: < 1 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2020: 2 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2010: 3 - 3.5 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2004: 5 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)


48

Figure 19 – Average cost of Building Integrated PV according to the three scenarios.

What can be seen is that according to Road Maps n.1 and n.2 by 2050 the average cost of grid-connected PV systems will be below 1 €/Wp both for Building Integrated PV and large Power Plant installations. According to the sensitivity analysis that we performed, assuming for the PV modules a slightly lower LR of 18% throughout, or even a decreasing one from an initial 20% to 10% after 2030, the order of magnitude of the results does not change, the only minor differences showing after 2040, which are however well within the confidence level associated with such long-term predictions.

Depending on the location and the specific technology, these price levels would allow electricity production costs between 2 to 8 c€/kWh, which would make PV competitive with other base-load technologies in most circumstances.

Predicted investment costs and electricity production costs according to the three scenarios are listed in Tables 14 and 15.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050

Year

€/W

p


2030: 1 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2040: < 1 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2020: 2 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2010: 3 - 3.5 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)

2004: 5 €/Wp (PV-TRAC)


49

V.Optimistic /

Techn.Breakthrough Optimistic /

Realistic Pessimistic

Investment cost (€/Wp) 4.7 Electricity cost (€/kWh)@ 1,800 kWh/(m2*a)

0.26 Present (Year 2004)

Electricity cost (€/kWh)@ 900 kWh/(m2*a)

0.48

Investment cost (€/Wp) 1.10 1.20 1.50 Electricity cost (€/kWh)@ 1,800 kWh/(m2*a)

0.05 0.06 0.08 Year 2025


0.10 0.11 0.15


0.02 0.04 0.06 Year 2050


0.05 0.07 0.11

Table 14 –Costs of Power Plant size PV according to the three Road Maps

V.Optimistic /

Techn.Breakthrough Optimistic /

Realistic Pessimistic

Investment cost (€/Wp) 5.30 Electricity cost (€/kWh)@ 1,800 kWh/(m2*a)

0.31 Present (Year 2004)


0.57


0.06 0.07 0.10 Year 2025


0.11 0.13 0.19


0.02 0.04 0.08 Year 2050


0.04 0.08 0.14

Table 15 –Costs of Building Integrated PV according to the three Road Maps


50

3 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of current Photovoltaic Technology

3.1 Technology description

For each technology the four phases fuel supply, production, operation, and disposal of the power plant have to be considered while carrying out the LCA. In the case of PV Systems the structure of the life cycle phases is shown in Figure 20. Only grid-connected PV systems have been considered in the current analysis. The functional unit is 1 kWh of electricity delivered at medium-voltage (MV) to the transmission and distribution grid.

Figure 20 - The four main life cycle phases of PV systems

The main phases are further split into sub phases. In particular the photovoltaic plant production phase includes the photovoltaic module production, the construction of the Balance of System (BOS) (i.e. inverters, other electrical components, and mechanical supporting structure) and the installation sub-phases, as shown in the green box of Figure 1.1. The photovoltaic module production sub-phase includes several processes that can vary according to the specific technology and semiconductor used: single crystalline silicon (sc-Si), multi crystalline silicon (mc-Si) amorphous silicon (a-Si), Copper Indium diSelenide (CIS), Cadmium Telluride (CdTe), etc.

For the current reference systems, only sc-Si and mc-Si PV systems are considered, which account for roughly 90% of the market share in 2004.

Furthermore, the life cycle performance of PV systems also depends on the type of installation (e.g. ground-mounted vs. building-integrated), and the location (and consequently the solar irradiation).

Results are explicitly shown for two irradiation levels, for ground-mounted power plants and four types of building installations.

3.2 Discussion of key issues

The flows related to 1 kWh produced by the modelled reference photovoltaic systems are mainly influenced by the electrical performance of the systems, the use of materials and energy in the manufacturing of photovoltaic modules and in the construction of the Balance of System.

Fuel supply Production of the plant

Operation of the plant

Disposal of the plant

Solar irradiation

PV System

PV module production

Balance of System

t i l

Installation

Dismantling

Disposal of components

Electricity


51

Material and energy flows data used in the PV systems models are taken from a review of the most recent available information from projects on LCA of PV systems, plus additional direct information to fill specific data gaps. Most recent literature projects and sources include the Swiss databank ecoinvent (Jungbluth 2003), the EU-project ECLIPSE (2003), the analysis of a new large power plant in the US (Mason et al 2005) and the outcomes of the project CRYSTALCLEAR (Alsema & de Wild-Scholten 2005). In particular, the latter are representative for the 2004 state-of the art of European silicon PV manufacturing firms.

The relevant parameters of the reference photovoltaic systems analysed are summarized in Table 16.

Present Unit Ground

mounted power plant

Tilted roof, retrofit

Flat roof, retrofit

Tilted roof, integrated

Vertical façade, integrated

Photovoltaic system parameters Size kWel 3500 1 1 1 1 Inverter kW 150 (n. 28) 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5

Location Central Europe

South. Europe

Central Europe

South. Europe

Central Europe

South. Europe

Central Europe

South. Europe

Central Europe

South. Europe

Solar irradiation kWh/m2,a 900 1800 900 1800 900 1800 900 1800 900 1800

El. performance ratio

% 93% 87% 86% 79% 92% 86% 88% 83% 62% 53%

Electricity annual production

kWh/kWp,a 838 1572 772 1430 829 1556 796 1493 509 954

Installed modules

sc-Si mc-Si

sc-Si mc-Si

sc-Si mc-Si

sc-Si mc-Si

sc-Si mc-Si

Main data sources

Eclipse 2003 Mason et al. 2005

Eclipse 2003 Jungbluth 2003

Eclipse 2003 IEA PVPS (2005): Jungbluth 2003

Eclipse 2003 Jungbluth 2003

Eclipse 2003, Jungbluth 2003

Photovoltaic module parameters Module tech. Single crystalline Silicon Multi crystalline Silicon Module eff. 14% 13% Wafer thickness

micron 270 (+ 180 losses) 285 (+180 losses)

Life time 25 25 Main data sources

Margadonna 2006, Crystalclear 2005, Jungbluth 2003

Crystalclear 2005 Jungbluth 2003, Eclipse 2003

Table 16 - Overview on all reference photovoltaic systems and key parameters for the current situation

In the future strong improvements of the technical performance are expected, first of all, as far as the present technology is concerned, in module efficiency, in wafer thickness and in technical life time of PV modules, and secondly with high-performance new concept devices.

3.3 Key emissions and land use

As a result of WP 1, a “minimum air pollutant list” to be used for the external cost assessment was defined within RS 1a and RS 1b. The emissions related to the current photovoltaic systems are shown in the annex I. The emissions shown in table 17 are an excerpt of this minimum list and were analysed as the most relevant. They refer to one kilowatthour of electricity delivered to the grid.


52

Present

Ground mounted power plant Tilted roof, retrofit Flat roof, retrofit Tilted roof, integrated Vertical facade, integrated

sc-Si mc-Si sc-Si mc-Si sc-Si mc-Si sc-Si mc-Si sc-Si mc-Si

CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE CE SE

Parameter Path

Unit kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel kWhel

CO2, fossil air kg 6.4E-02 3.4E-02 7.9E-02 4.2E-02 7.2E-02 3.9E-02 8.8E-02 4.7E-02 6.9E-02 3.7E-02 8.3E-02 4.5E-02 6.4E-02 3.5E-02 8.1E-02 4.3E-02 1.1E-01 5.7E-02 1.4E-01 7.3E-02

CH4, fossil air kg 1.2E-04 6.1E-05 1.4E-04 7.3E-05 1.3E-04 6.9E-05 1.5E-04 8.2E-05 1.1E-04 5.9E-05 1.3E-04 7.0E-05 1.1E-04 6.0E-05 1.3E-04 7.1E-05 1.9E-04 9.9E-03 2.2E-04 1.2E-04

NOx air kg 1.6E-04 8.6E-05 1.9E-04 1.0E-04 1.8E-04 9.5E-05 2.1E-04 1.1E-04 2.1E-04 1.1E-04 2.4E-04 1.3E-04 1.6E-04 8.4E-05 1.9E-04 1.0E-04 2.7E-04 1.4E-04 3.4E-04 1.8E-04

NMVOC air kg 8.8E-05 4.7E-05 9.8E-05 5.2E-05 9.2E-05 5.0E-05 1.0E-04 5.6E-05 9.6E-05 5.1E-05 1.1E-04 5.6E-05 8.6E-05 4.6E-05 9.7E-05 5.2E-05 1.5E-04 7.8E-05 1.7E-04 9.0E-05

PM2,5µm air kg 2.6E-05 1.4E-05 3.0E-05 1.6E-05 3.1E-05 1.7E-05 3.5E-05 1.9E-05 2.7E-05 1.4E-05 3.1E-05 1.6E-05 2.5E-05 1.3E-05 2.9E-05 1.5E-05 4.0E-05 2.1E-05 4.8E-05 2.5E-05

SO2 air kg 2.6E-04 1.4E-04 2.9E-04 1.5E-04 3.0E-04 1.6E-04 3.4E-04 1.8E-04 2.5E-04 1.4E-04 2.9E-04 1.6E-04 2.8E-04 1.5E-04 3.1E-04 1.7E-04 4.6E-05 2.4E-04 5.2E-04 2.8E-04

Occupation, built up area incl. Min. extraction and dump sites

m2

a 1.0E-02 5.5E-03 1.1E-02 5.7E-03 9.8E-04 5.3E-03 1.3E-3 7.1E-03 9.6E-04 5.1E-04 1.27E-03 6.8E-04 8.1E-04 4.3E-04 1.1E-03 6.0E-03 1.3E-03 7.1E-04 1.88E-03 1.0E-03

Table 17 - Key emissions and land use of the reference systems (current situation).


53

A first analysis shows that the specific emissions of analysed systems vary significantly depending on the irradiation conditions, which are influenced by the location (Central Europe vs Southern Europe) and by the position of the modules (vertical vs optimal angle).

Single crystalline silicon technology shows better performance than multi crystalline. The reason for this result is found in the surprising reduction of energy requirements of the most recent technologies for single crystalline silicon ingot growth.

The modern ground-mounted power plants show very good environmental performance, comparable to the one of tilted roofs, retrofit or integrated. This is due to the new advanced design, which allows a strong reduction of the use of materials.

In general, excluding the influence of irradiation, no remarkable differences related to the different technologies have been noticed.

3.4 Contribution analysis and interpretation

In the following figure the contribution of the main life cycle phases for selected PV systems are shown.

Figure 21 Contribution analysis for selected PV systems

Figure 21 highlights that the construction phase is absolutely the main contributor to the impacts. Operation and fuel have no effect, as expected. The contribution of the disposal phase depends on the amounts of materials sent to disposal, the higher the amounts the higher the impacts associated to the transports and the processes; as consequence the “flat roof, retrofit” disposal (Figure 21), because of high amounts of concrete, and “vertical façade, integrated” disposal, due to special glass layers, show the highest contribution, while the “tilted roof, integrated” disposal shows negligible contribution.

As far as the construction phase is concerned, the major part of the environmental burdens is mainly due to the energy requirements of the upstream processes related to the production of silicon and PV wafers. Strong improvements in energy consumption (e.g. silicon ingot growth by Czochralsky process) have been noticed with respect to the past and even better efficiencies can be foreseen for the future. The environmental impacts are secondarily due to the materials needed for the installation and the operation of the PV systems, i.e. aluminium frame, steel in mechanical BOS and inverters.

Electricity, PV, ground mounted power plant, sc-Si, Southern Europe

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Carbon dioxide, fossil

Methane, fossil

Nitrogen oxides

NMVOC

PM2.5

Sulfur dioxide

Occupation, agricultural and forestal area

Occupation, built up area incl. mineralextraction and dump sites

Construction

Operation

Fuel

Disposal

Electricity, pv, flat roof, retrofit, sc-Si, Southern Europe

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Electricity, pv, tilted roof, integrated, sc-Si, Southern Europe

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


54

4 LCA of future Photovoltaic Technology

As shown in chapter 2, the future of photovoltaic technologies is expected to be based on strong improvements of current technologies and also on the development of new devices, which are currently at a laboratory scale.

4.1 Technology description and material flows

As for present technology, the four phases fuel supply, production, operation, and disposal of the power plant have been considered while carrying out the LCA (see Figure 20 in previous chapter). Only grid-connected PV systems have been considered in the current analysis. The functional unit is 1 kWh of electricity delivered at medium-voltage (MV) to the transmission and distribution grid.

Three development scenarios have been considered:

• Very optimistic scenario • Optimistic-realistic scenario • Pessimistic scenario

According to the scenarios different technologies have been evaluated. After a preliminary screening analysis the most promising technologies were selected, depending on the availability of reliable data . The data are the results of estimations based on current literature data (roadmaps and technology papers); these estimations, related both to key parameters and materials flows, have been verified and approved by experts, by means of specific check lists.

For all the technologies two location have been considered: Central (900 kWh/m2) and Southern Europe (1800 kWh/m2). “Ground mounted power plant” and “Integrated roof” installations have been evaluated for each photovoltaic technology.

The key parameters of the evaluated technologies, as well as data sources and estimations are reported in Table 18.


55

Year 2025 Year 2050 Technology sc-Si ribbon-

Si CdTe UHE (conc./III-V cells) Crystalline-Si CdTe UHE

(conc./III-V cells)

Layer thickness (μm) 100 150 100 % Avg. module efficiency 22 20 18 35 25 22 50 Module lifetime (yrs)

35 30 30 50 40 45

Avg. system efficiency 90 95

Material and energy flows source

Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry Fthenakis et al

2006, Mohr et al. 2006

Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry Fthenakis et al 2006, Mohr et al. 2006

VER

Y O

PTI

MIS

TIC

Estimation Process materials and energy: -20% of current data

Process materials and energy: -20%

of current data


of current data


of current data


of current data

Process materials and energy: -35% of

current data Layer thickness (μm) 100 150 - - 100 - - % Avg. module efficiency 22 20 18 35 22 22 40 Module lifetime (yrs)

35 30 30 30 40 35 35

Avg. system efficiency (%) 90 95

Material and energy flows source

Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry Fthenakis et al

2006, Mohr et al. 2006

Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry Fthenakis et al 2006, Mohr et al. 2006 R

EALI

STIC

O

PTI

MIS

TIC



of current data


of current data


of current data


of current data


current data Layer thickness (μm) 150 200 150 % Avg. module efficiency 17 14 12 NA 18 16 35 Module lifetime (yrs)

30 25 NA 35 30 30

Avg. system efficiency (%) 90 95 Material and energy flows source

Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry NA Crystalclear 2005 Data from Industry Fthenakis et al 2006, Mohr et al. 2006

PES

SIM

ISTI

C



current data


current data


current data


current data

Process materials and energy: -35% of current

data

Table 18 Key parameters and data sources


56

4.2 Results

Several datasets and Life Cycle Inventories have been produced for the selected technologies described above. For the sake of synthesis, average results are shown, calculated by means of a set of weights which consider the technology shares described in chapter 2, the share of Power Plant and Integrated roof (accounted as 10% for the first one and 90% for the second) and the contribution related to Location/Irradiation (in 2025, 50% for Central and Southern Europe, in 2050, 25% for Central Europe and 75% for Southern Europe). An excerpt of the calculated emissions and resources are shown in Table 19, the complete list in Annex II.

Parameter Path Unit 2025 Very Optimistic

2025 Optimistic realistic

2025 Pessimistic

2050 Very Optimistic

2050 Optimistic realistic

2050 Pessimistic

Occupation, agricultural and forestal area resource m2a 3,99E-04 4,15E-04 8,94E-04 1,55E-04 4,80E-03 3,34E-04

Occupation, built up area incl. mineral extraction and dump sites

resource m2a 5,13E-04 5,15E-04 9,00E-04 1,81E-03 1,33E-05 4,36E-04

Carbon dioxide, fossil air kg 8,85E-03 9,31E-03 1,96E-02 3,25E-03 1,69E-05 5,79E-03

Methane, fossil air kg 1,77E-05 2,02E-05 4,28E-05 9,29E-06 1,08E-05 1,57E-05

Nitrogen oxides air kg 2,47E-05 2,59E-05 5,36E-05 1,12E-05 6,95E-06 2,27E-05

NMVOC total air kg 1,98E-05 2,01E-05 4,67E-05 5,40E-06 3,93E-06 1,78E-05

PM2.5-10 air kg 6,06E-06 6,19E-06 1,06E-05 5,72E-06 1,96E-05 5,27E-06

PM2.5 air kg 4,58E-06 4,93E-06 8,52E-06 3,06E-06 2,21E-04 4,31E-06

Sulfur dioxide air kg 3,82E-05 4,08E-05 8,11E-05 1,15E-05 1,57E-03 4,17E-05

Table 19 – Key emissions and land use for future photovoltaic systems

PV Results - comparison

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Carbon dioxide, fossil Methane, fossil Nitrogen oxides NMVOC total PM2.5-10 PM2.5 Sulfur dioxide

Current 2025 Pessimistic 2025 Optimistic realistic 2025 Very Optimistic 2050 Pessimistic 2050 Optimistic realistic 2050 Very Optimistic

Figure 22 – Comparison of selected emissions for photovoltaic systems Table 19 and Figure 22 show that the environmental impacts of photovoltaic systems will be strongly reduced with respect to current performance, according to all development scenarios. This is true for all the reported emissions. For the sake of completeness, in order to show the variability of the results, Figure 23 reports the indicator of CO2 emissions, as an example, for all the evaluated technologies in 2025 and 2050, for Realistic Optimistic Scenario and Southern Europe location. It has to be highlighted that, as far as the CO2 emissions indicator is concerned, the technology which absolutely shows the best performance is the thin film CdTe technology. Minor differences can be noticed in the other reported technologies.


57

Figure 23 – Detailed results of evaluated technologies for selected indicator

4.2.1 Contribution analysis

As for current technology, the study demonstrates that the major contribution to the impacts is due to the Construction phase, minor contribution comes from Dismantling and no impacts are associated to Operation and fuel production phases. As examples, Figure 24 and 25 show contribution analysis for 2025 Realistic Opimistic (RO) scenario and 2050 RO scenario. No significant differences have been encountered in the results of the other evaluated scenarios.

Figure 24 – Contribution analysis for average PV el of 2025 RO scenario

Contribution analysis - el. PV average, tech & location2025 RO

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Occupation, agricultural and forestalarea

Occupation, built up area incl.mineral extraction and dump sites


Methane, fossil

Nitrogen oxides

NMVOC total

PM2.5-10

PM2.5

Sulfur dioxide

ConstructionOperationFuelDismantling

CO2 emissions - technologies (RO scenario)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

el., pv, groundmounted

pow er plant,sc-Si, 100, SE

el., pv, tiltedroof, sc-Si,integrated,

100, SE


pow er plant, c-Si, thick, SE

el., pv, tiltedroof, c-Si,integrated,thick, SE

el., pv, tiltedroof, CdTe,

integrated, SE


pow er plant, c-Si, low eff., SE

el., pv, tiltedroof, c-Si,

integrated, loweff., SE

el., pv, tiltedroof, CdTe,integrated,short, SE

el., pv,concentrator,GaInP/GaAs,

short, SE

g C

O2

2025 2050


58

Figure 25 – Contribution analysis for average PV el of 2050 RO scenario

References

Crystalclear 2005: M.J. de Wild-Scholten, E.A. Alsema, Environmental Life Cycle Inventory of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Module Production, Proceedings of the Materials Research Society Fall 2005 Meeting, Symposium G, Boston, USA, 28-30 November 2005, online publication at: www.mrs.org

Eclipse 2003: P. Frankl, A. Corrado, S. Lombardelli, ECLIPSE Report, Photovoltaic Systems, December 2003, www.eclipse-eu.org Eiffert, P., and the International Energy Acency - IEA – PVPS Task 7 (2003). Non-Technical Barriers to the

Commercialisation of PV Power Systems in the Built Environment, NREL Technical Report. ENEA (2004): V. Brandi, P. Frankl, E. Menichetti, Green pricing – Un prezzo speciale per l’Energia elettrica

verde, Roma 2004 EPIA (2004a): European Photovoltaic Industry Association Roadmap 2004, June 2004 EPIA (2004b): EPIA, Greenpeace, Solar generation report, October 2004 EPIA (2005): Position paper on a feed-in tariff for photovoltaic solar electricity, 2005 EPIA (2006): EPIA, Greenpeace, Solar generation report, September 2006 EREC (2004): EREC, Renewable Energy Scenario to 2040, 2004 EREC (2007): Energy [r]evolution – A Sustainable World Energy Outlook. Global Energy Scenario Report,

January 2007. Fthenakis et al 2006: V.M. Fthenakis and H.C. Kim, Life Cycle Energy Demand and Greenhouse Gas

Emissions from an Amonix High Concentrator Photovoltaic System, National PV EH&S Research Center Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, USA

Goetzberger (2002): A. Goetzberger, “Applied Solar Energy”, FraunhoferInstitute for Solar Energy Systems (FhG/ISE), 2002

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Occupation, agricultural and forestal area

Occupation, built up area incl. mineralextraction and dump sites


Methane, fossil

Nitrogen oxides

NMVOC total

PM2.5-10

PM2.5

Sulfur dioxide

ConstructionOperationFuelDismantling


59

Grätzel (2000): M. Grätzel, Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 8, 171 (2000) Hansen 2003: T. Hansen, The Promise of Utility Scale Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Distributed Generation, Tucson

Electric Power, POWER-GEN International 2003, December 2003 Hoffmann (2004a): W. Hoffmann, PV Solar Electricity Industry: Market Growth and Perspective, Proceedings,

14th PVSEC, Bangkok, 2004. Hoffmann (2004b): W. Hoffmann, A Vision for PV Technology up to 2030 and beyond - An industry view;

Brussels, September 2004, IEA PVPS (2005): http://www.oja-services.nl/iea-pvps/pv/index.htm IEA / OECD (2006): Energy Technology Perspectives 2006. Scenarios and Strategies to 2050. IEA

Publications, Paris. Kyoto Club, Ises Italia (2003): Proceedings of the workshop “Fonti rinnovabili: il momento delle scelte”,

Roma, October 22nd 2003 Jungbluth 2003: Jungbluth N: “Photovoltaik”. In: Sachbilanzen von Energiesystemen: Grund-lagen für den

ökologischen Vergleich von Energiesystemen und den Einbezug von Energie-systemen in Ökobilanzen für die Schweiz (Ed. Dones R.). Final report ecoinvent 2000 No. 6-XII Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, CH, retrieved from: www.ecoinvent.ch

Margadonna 2006: personal communication by Daniele Margadonna, January 2006 Mason et al. 2005: J.M Mason, V.M Fthenakis, T. Hansen and H.C. Kim, Energy payback and life Cycle CO2

Emissions of the BOS in an Optimized 3,5 MW PV installation, May 2005 Mohr et al. 2006: N. J. Mohr, J. J. Schermer, M. A. J. Huijbregts, A. Meijer and L. Reijnders, Life Cycle

Assessment of Thinfilm GaAs and GaInP/GaAs Solar Modules, Progress in Photovoltaics Research and Application, September 2006

NEDO (2004): Overview of “PV Roadmap Toward 2030”, New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO), New energy Technology Development Department, Kawasaki, Japan, June 2004

PHOTEX (2004): [PHOTEX 2004]: G.J. Schaeffer et al., Learning from the sun, Analysis of the use of experience curves for energy policy purposes: The case of photovoltaic power, Final report of the Photex project, ECN-C—04-035, August 2004

PVACCEPT (2005): Universitaet der Kuenste Berlin, Ambiente Italia, Università di Siena, IOEW, Wuerth Solar, Sunways, BUSI Impianti, Final Report, IPS-2000-0090, February 2005

PVNET (2004): PVNET Roadmap for European Research and Development for Photovoltaics, EC project, Final Report, 2004

PV-STATUS (2005): A. Jäger-Waldau, PV Status Report 2005, Research, Solar Cell Production and Market Implementation of Photovoltaics, DG JRC, Ispra, Italy, August 2005

PV-TRAC (2005): A Vision for Photovoltaic Technology, Photovoltaic Technology Research Advisory Council (PV-TRAC), EC, 2005

REMAC2000 (2003): Cesi, Ecobilancio Italia, NET, ECN, IEPE, A Roadmap for Renewable Energy Market Acceleration

Wyers (2004): P. Wyers, The PV Roadmap and Prospects for Silicon, presentation at FOM Seminar Solar cell research, the Netherlands, retrieved from http://www.jointsolarpanel.nl


60

5 Annex

5.1 Annex I– Minimum list of current photovoltaic technologies

electricity, photovoltaic, ground mounted

power plant, sc-Si, Central Europe

electricity, photovoltaic, ground mounted power plant, sc-Si, Southern Europe


power plant, mc-Si, Central Europe


power plant, mc-Si, Southern Europe

Total Construc

tion

Operati

on

Fuel Disposal Total Construct

ion

Operati

on

Fuel Disposal Total Construc

tion

Operati

on


tion

Operatio

n

Fuel Disposal

kWh kWh kWh kWh

Resources

Coal, brown, in ground resource kg 1.22E-02 1.21E-02 0 0 7.56E-05 6.48E-03 6.43E-03 0 0 4.03E-05 1.36E-02 1.36E-02 0 0 7.56E-05 7.26E-03 7.22E-03 0 0 4.03E-05

Coal, hard, unspecified, in ground resource kg 1.08E-02 1.07E-02 0 0 5.08E-05 5.74E-03 5.71E-03 0 0 2.71E-05 1.26E-02 1.25E-02 0 0 5.08E-05 6.69E-03 6.66E-03 0 0 2.71E-05

Gas, natural, in ground resource Nm3 8.52E-03 8.49E-03 0 0 2.84E-05 4.53E-03 4.52E-03 0 0 1.51E-05 9.71E-03 9.68E-03 0 0 2.84E-05 5.17E-03 5.15E-03 0 0 1.51E-05

Oil, crude, in ground resource kg 6.50E-03 6.36E-03 0 0 1.34E-04 3.46E-03 3.39E-03 0 0 7.13E-05 8.07E-03 7.94E-03 0 0 1.34E-04 4.30E-03 4.23E-03 0 0 7.13E-05

Uranium, in ground resource kg 5.73E-07 5.69E-07 0 0 3.51E-09 3.05E-07 3.03E-07 0 0 1.87E-09 6.48E-07 6.44E-07 0 0 3.51E-09 3.45E-07 3.43E-07 0 0 1.87E-09

Freshwater (lake, river, groundwater) resource m3 6.44E-04 6.40E-04 0 0 4.07E-06 3.43E-04 3.41E-04 0 0 2.17E-06 7.51E-04 7.47E-04 0 0 4.07E-06 4.00E-04 3.98E-04 0 0 2.17E-06

Occupation, agricultural and forestal

area resource m2a 1.64E-03 1.64E-03 0 0 5.01E-06 8.76E-04 8.73E-04 0 0 2.67E-06 2.01E-03 2.00E-03 0 0 5.01E-06 1.07E-03 1.07E-03 0 0 2.67E-06

Occupation, built up area incl. mineral

extraction and dump sites resource m2a 1.04E-02 1.04E-02 0 0 6.84E-06 5.54E-03 5.53E-03 0 0 3.64E-06 1.07E-02 1.07E-02 0 0 6.84E-06 5.71E-03 5.70E-03 0 0 3.64E-06

Emissions to air

Ammonia air kg 9.58E-06 9.56E-06 0 0 1.81E-08 5.10E-06 5.09E-06 0 0 9.63E-09 1.05E-05 1.05E-05 0 0 1.81E-08 5.58E-06 5.57E-06 0 0 9.63E-09

Arsenic air kg 7.65E-08 7.65E-08 0 0 2.89E-11 4.07E-08 4.07E-08 0 0 1.54E-11 7.99E-08 7.99E-08 0 0 2.89E-11 4.26E-08 4.26E-08 0 0 1.54E-11

Benzene air kg 3.37E-07 3.30E-07 0 0 6.95E-09 1.79E-07 1.76E-07 0 0 3.70E-09 3.86E-07 3.79E-07 0 0 6.95E-09 2.05E-07 2.02E-07 0 0 3.70E-09

Benzo(a)pyrene air kg 1.71E-09 1.70E-09 0 0 7.56E-12 9.12E-10 9.08E-10 0 0 4.03E-12 1.89E-09 1.88E-09 0 0 7.56E-12 1.01E-09 1.00E-09 0 0 4.03E-12

Cadmium air kg 2.52E-08 2.52E-08 0 0 2.13E-11 1.34E-08 1.34E-08 0 0 1.14E-11 2.62E-08 2.62E-08 0 0 2.13E-11 1.40E-08 1.40E-08 0 0 1.14E-11

Carbon dioxide, fossil air kg 6.39E-02 6.15E-02 0 0 2.36E-03 3.40E-02 3.27E-02 0 0 1.26E-03 7.86E-02 7.62E-02 0 0 2.36E-03 4.18E-02 4.06E-02 0 0 1.26E-03

Carbon monoxide, fossil air kg 1.08E-04 1.07E-04 0 0 1.43E-06 5.75E-05 5.68E-05 0 0 7.63E-07 1.23E-04 1.22E-04 0 0 1.43E-06 6.55E-05 6.47E-05 0 0 7.63E-07

Carbon-14 air kBq 1.00E-03 9.97E-04 0 0 6.29E-06 5.34E-04 5.31E-04 0 0 3.35E-06 1.14E-03 1.13E-03 0 0 6.29E-06 6.05E-04 6.02E-04 0 0 3.35E-06


61

Chromium air kg 4.72E-07 4.72E-07 0 0 1.43E-10 2.52E-07 2.52E-07 0 0 7.62E-11 5.88E-07 5.87E-07 0 0 1.43E-10 3.13E-07 3.13E-07 0 0 7.62E-11

Chromium VI air kg 1.15E-08 1.14E-08 0 0 3.12E-12 6.10E-09 6.10E-09 0 0 1.66E-12 1.43E-08 1.43E-08 0 0 3.12E-12 7.59E-09 7.59E-09 0 0 1.66E-12

Dinitrogen monoxide air kg 4.21E-06 4.17E-06 0 0 3.84E-08 2.24E-06 2.22E-06 0 0 2.04E-08 4.38E-06 4.34E-06 0 0 3.84E-08 2.33E-06 2.31E-06 0 0 2.04E-08

Formaldehyde air kg 8.53E-08 8.49E-08 0 0 4.25E-10 4.54E-08 4.52E-08 0 0 2.26E-10 9.68E-08 9.64E-08 0 0 4.25E-10 5.15E-08 5.13E-08 0 0 2.26E-10

Iodine-129 air kBq 9.91E-07 9.85E-07 0 0 6.24E-09 5.28E-07 5.24E-07 0 0 3.33E-09 1.12E-06 1.11E-06 0 0 6.24E-09 5.96E-07 5.93E-07 0 0 3.33E-09

Lead air kg 6.09E-06 6.06E-06 0 0 3.04E-08 3.24E-06 3.23E-06 0 0 1.62E-08 6.84E-06 6.81E-06 0 0 3.04E-08 3.64E-06 3.62E-06 0 0 1.62E-08

Methane, fossil air kg 1.16E-04 1.15E-04 0 0 6.80E-07 6.15E-05 6.12E-05 0 0 3.62E-07 1.37E-04 1.36E-04 0 0 6.80E-07 7.27E-05 7.24E-05 0 0 3.62E-07

Mercury air kg 6.16E-09 6.13E-09 0 0 2.58E-11 3.28E-09 3.27E-09 0 0 1.38E-11 7.13E-09 7.11E-09 0 0 2.58E-11 3.80E-09 3.79E-09 0 0 1.38E-11

Nickel air kg 1.74E-07 1.74E-07 0 0 2.51E-10 9.26E-08 9.25E-08 0 0 1.33E-10 1.84E-07 1.83E-07 0 0 2.51E-10 9.78E-08 9.77E-08 0 0 1.33E-10

Nitrogen oxides air kg 1.62E-04 1.58E-04 0 0 4.45E-06 8.64E-05 8.40E-05 0 0 2.37E-06 1.93E-04 1.89E-04 0 0 4.45E-06 1.03E-04 1.00E-04 0 0 2.37E-06

NMVOC air kg 8.81E-05 8.74E-05 0 0 7.49E-07 4.69E-05 4.65E-05 0 0 3.99E-07 9.80E-05 9.72E-05 0 0 7.49E-07 5.22E-05 5.18E-05 0 0 3.99E-07

PAH air kg 2.85E-08 2.83E-08 0 0 1.66E-10 1.52E-08 1.51E-08 0 0 8.84E-11 3.09E-08 3.08E-08 0 0 1.66E-10 1.65E-08 1.64E-08 0 0 8.84E-11

PM2.5 air kg 2.64E-05 2.60E-05 0 0 3.49E-07 1.41E-05 1.39E-05 0 0 1.86E-07 3.01E-05 2.97E-05 0 0 3.49E-07 1.60E-05 1.58E-05 0 0 1.86E-07

PM10 air kg 5.13E-05 5.08E-05 0 0 4.34E-07 2.73E-05 2.71E-05 0 0 2.31E-07 5.80E-05 5.76E-05 0 0 4.34E-07 3.09E-05 3.07E-05 0 0 2.31E-07

PCDD/F (measured as I-TEQ) air kg 5.89E-14 5.34E-14 0 0 5.52E-15 3.13E-14 2.84E-14 0 0 2.94E-15 7.04E-14 6.49E-14 0 0 5.52E-15 3.75E-14 3.45E-14 0 0 2.94E-15

Radon-222 air kBq 1.81E+01 1.80E+01 0 0 1.14E-01 9.66E+00 9.60E+00 0 0 6.05E-02 2.05E+01 2.04E+01 0 0 1.14E-01 1.09E+01 1.09E+01 0 0 6.05E-02

Sulfur dioxide air kg 2.58E-04 2.56E-04 0 0 1.39E-06 1.37E-04 1.36E-04 0 0 7.42E-07 2.89E-04 2.88E-04 0 0 1.39E-06 1.54E-04 1.53E-04 0 0 7.42E-07

Emissions to water

Ammonium, ion water kg 1.61E-04 1.61E-04 0 0 1.95E-09 8.60E-05 8.60E-05 0 0 1.04E-09 1.74E-04 1.74E-04 0 0 1.95E-09 9.26E-05 9.26E-05 0 0 1.04E-09

Arsenic, ion water kg 9.59E-08 9.44E-08 0 0 1.56E-09 5.11E-08 5.03E-08 0 0 8.30E-10 1.75E-07 1.74E-07 0 0 1.56E-09 9.33E-08 9.25E-08 0 0 8.30E-10

Cadmium, ion water kg 2.78E-08 2.71E-08 0 0 6.63E-10 1.48E-08 1.44E-08 0 0 3.53E-10 3.04E-08 2.97E-08 0 0 6.63E-10 1.62E-08 1.58E-08 0 0 3.53E-10

Carbon-14 water kBq 3.86E-04 3.84E-04 0 0 2.43E-06 2.06E-04 2.04E-04 0 0 1.30E-06 4.36E-04 4.34E-04 0 0 2.43E-06 2.32E-04 2.31E-04 0 0 1.30E-06

Cesium-137 water kBq 1.85E-04 1.84E-04 0 0 1.17E-06 9.86E-05 9.80E-05 0 0 6.21E-07 2.09E-04 2.08E-04 0 0 1.17E-06 1.11E-04 1.11E-04 0 0 6.21E-07

Chromium, ion water kg 6.55E-09 6.40E-09 0 0 1.51E-10 3.49E-09 3.41E-09 0 0 8.05E-11 7.63E-09 7.47E-09 0 0 1.51E-10 4.06E-09 3.98E-09 0 0 8.05E-11

Chromium VI water kg 7.39E-07 7.33E-07 0 0 5.61E-09 3.93E-07 3.90E-07 0 0 2.99E-09 9.22E-07 9.16E-07 0 0 5.61E-09 4.91E-07 4.88E-07 0 0 2.99E-09

COD water kg 9.66E-04 9.53E-04 0 0 1.31E-05 5.15E-04 5.08E-04 0 0 6.96E-06 2.14E-03 2.12E-03 0 0 1.31E-05 1.14E-03 1.13E-03 0 0 6.96E-06

Copper, ion water kg 8.75E-07 7.02E-07 0 0 1.73E-07 4.66E-07 3.74E-07 0 0 9.20E-08 9.52E-07 7.79E-07 0 0 1.73E-07 5.07E-07 4.15E-07 0 0 9.20E-08

Lead water kg 5.86E-06 5.82E-06 0 0 4.28E-08 3.12E-06 3.10E-06 0 0 2.28E-08 6.44E-06 6.39E-06 0 0 4.28E-08 3.43E-06 3.40E-06 0 0 2.28E-08


62

Mercury water kg 4.02E-09 3.98E-09 0 0 4.72E-11 2.14E-09 2.12E-09 0 0 2.51E-11 4.43E-09 4.38E-09 0 0 4.72E-11 2.36E-09 2.33E-09 0 0 2.51E-11

Nickel, ion water kg 2.52E-06 2.51E-06 0 0 1.53E-08 1.34E-06 1.34E-06 0 0 8.13E-09 3.10E-06 3.08E-06 0 0 1.53E-08 1.65E-06 1.64E-06 0 0 8.13E-09

Nitrate water kg 7.39E-04 7.39E-04 0 0 2.23E-07 3.94E-04 3.94E-04 0 0 1.19E-07 7.67E-04 7.67E-04 0 0 2.23E-07 4.08E-04 4.08E-04 0 0 1.19E-07

Oils, unspecified water kg 2.40E-05 2.35E-05 0 0 5.31E-07 1.28E-05 1.25E-05 0 0 2.83E-07 2.86E-05 2.81E-05 0 0 5.31E-07 1.52E-05 1.50E-05 0 0 2.83E-07

PAH water kg 1.27E-08 1.26E-08 0 0 5.01E-11 6.75E-09 6.73E-09 0 0 2.67E-11 1.55E-08 1.55E-08 0 0 5.01E-11 8.26E-09 8.23E-09 0 0 2.67E-11

Phosphate water kg 4.54E-05 4.54E-05 0 0 1.10E-08 2.42E-05 2.42E-05 0 0 5.88E-09 5.23E-05 5.22E-05 0 0 1.10E-08 2.78E-05 2.78E-05 0 0 5.88E-09

Emissions to Soil

Arsenic soil kg 1.41E-09 1.41E-09 0 0 1.53E-12 7.52E-10 7.51E-10 0 0 8.15E-13 1.53E-09 1.53E-09 0 0 1.53E-12 8.15E-10 8.14E-10 0 0 8.15E-13

Cadmium soil kg 9.83E-10 9.80E-10 0 0 2.85E-12 5.24E-10 5.22E-10 0 0 1.52E-12 1.06E-09 1.06E-09 0 0 2.85E-12 5.66E-10 5.64E-10 0 0 1.52E-12

Chromium soil kg 6.13E-08 6.12E-08 0 0 1.40E-10 3.26E-08 3.26E-08 0 0 7.47E-11 6.71E-08 6.70E-08 0 0 1.40E-10 3.57E-08 3.57E-08 0 0 7.47E-11

Chromium VI soil kg 1.85E-08 1.84E-08 0 0 9.22E-11 9.86E-09 9.82E-09 0 0 4.91E-11 2.09E-08 2.08E-08 0 0 9.22E-11 1.11E-08 1.11E-08 0 0 4.91E-11

Lead soil kg 5.30E-08 5.30E-08 0 0 1.52E-11 2.82E-08 2.82E-08 0 0 8.09E-12 5.71E-08 5.71E-08 0 0 1.52E-11 3.04E-08 3.04E-08 0 0 8.09E-12

Mercury soil kg 9.51E-10 9.51E-10 0 0 7.20E-15 5.06E-10 5.06E-10 0 0 3.83E-15 1.02E-09 1.02E-09 0 0 7.20E-15 5.45E-10 5.45E-10 0 0 3.83E-15

Oils, unspecified soil kg 2.28E-05 2.23E-05 0 0 5.48E-07 1.22E-05 1.19E-05 0 0 2.92E-07 2.73E-05 2.68E-05 0 0 5.48E-07 1.45E-05 1.43E-05 0 0 2.92E-07

electricity, photovoltaic, tilted roof, sc-Si,

retrofit, Central Europe


retrofit, Southern Europe

electricity, photovoltaic, tilted roof, mc-Si,


electricity, photovoltaic, tilted roof, mc-Si,


Total Construc

tion

Operati

on


ion

Operati

on


tion

Operati

on


tion

Operatio

n

Fuel Disposal

kWh kWh kWh kWh

Resources








63





Emissions to air

























64

Radon-222 air kBq

1.99E+0

1 1.98E+01 0 0 1.15E-01 1.07E+01 1.07E+01 0 0 6.19E-02 2.25E+01 2.24E+01 0 0 1.15E-01 1.22E+01 1.21E+01 0 0 6.19E-02


Emissions to water

















Emissions to Soil









65

electricity, photovoltaic, flat roof, sc-Si,


electricity, photovoltaic, flat roof, sc-Si,


electricity, photovoltaic, flat roof, mc-Si,

retrofit, Central Europe)

electricity, photovoltaic, flat roof, mc-Si,


Total Construc

tion

Operati

on


ion

Operati

on


tion

Operati

on


tion

Operatio

n

Fuel Disposal

kWh kWh kWh kWh

Resources











Emissions to air











66















Radon-222 air kBq

1.84E+0

1 1.79E+01 0 0 4.35E-01 9.78E+00 9.55E+00 0 0 2.32E-01 2.08E+01 2.03E+01 0 0 4.35E-01 1.11E+01 1.08E+01 0 0 2.32E-01


Emissions to water












67




Oils, unspecified water kg 2.96E-05 2.02E-05 0 0 9.41E-06 1.58E-05 1.08E-05 0 0 5.02E-06 3.41E-05 2.47E-05 0 0 9.41E-06 1.82E-05 1.32E-05 0 0 5.02E-06 PAH water kg 1.11E-08 1.03E-08 0 0 8.68E-10 5.94E-09 5.48E-09 0 0 4.63E-10 1.39E-08 1.30E-08 0 0 8.68E-10 7.39E-09 6.93E-09 0 0 4.63E-10 Phosphate water kg 4.48E-05 4.46E-05 0 0 1.33E-07 2.39E-05 2.38E-05 0 0 7.08E-08 5.16E-05 5.15E-05 0 0 1.33E-07 2.75E-05 2.74E-05 0 0 7.08E-08 Emissions to Soil Arsenic soil kg 1.44E-09 1.42E-09 0 0 2.62E-11 7.70E-10 7.56E-10 0 0 1.40E-11 1.56E-09 1.54E-09 0 0 2.62E-11 8.33E-10 8.19E-10 0 0 1.40E-11 Cadmium soil kg 1.08E-09 9.93E-10 0 0 8.55E-11 5.75E-10 5.30E-10 0 0 4.56E-11 1.16E-09 1.07E-09 0 0 8.55E-11 6.18E-10 5.72E-10 0 0 4.56E-11 Chromium soil kg 6.30E-08 6.14E-08 0 0 1.61E-09 3.36E-08 3.27E-08 0 0 8.59E-10 6.88E-08 6.72E-08 0 0 1.61E-09 3.67E-08 3.58E-08 0 0 8.59E-10 Chromium VI soil kg 1.87E-08 1.83E-08 0 0 4.31E-10 9.96E-09 9.73E-09 0 0 2.30E-10 2.10E-08 2.06E-08 0 0 4.31E-10 1.12E-08 1.10E-08 0 0 2.30E-10 Lead soil kg 5.40E-08 5.36E-08 0 0 4.45E-10 2.88E-08 2.86E-08 0 0 2.38E-10 5.81E-08 5.77E-08 0 0 4.45E-10 3.10E-08 3.08E-08 0 0 2.38E-10 Mercury soil kg 9.61E-10 9.61E-10 0 0 4.76E-14 5.12E-10 5.12E-10 0 0 2.54E-14 1.03E-09 1.03E-09 0 0 4.76E-14 5.52E-10 5.52E-10 0 0 2.54E-14 Oils, unspecified soil kg 2.94E-05 1.97E-05 0 0 9.66E-06 1.57E-05 1.05E-05 0 0 5.15E-06 3.39E-05 2.42E-05 0 0 9.66E-06 1.81E-05 1.29E-05 0 0 5.15E-06


integrated, Central Europe


integrated, Southern Europe


integrated, Central Europe)


integrated, Southern Europe

Total Construc

tion

Operati

on


ion

Operati

on


tion

Operati

on


tion

Operatio

n

Fuel Disposal

kWh kWh kWh kWh

Resources







Occupation, agricultural and forestal resource m2a 1.63E-03 1.63E-03 0 0 3.98E-06 8.72E-04 8.70E-04 0 0 2.12E-06 2.00E-03 2.00E-03 0 0 3.98E-06 1.07E-03 1.07E-03 0 0 2.12E-06


68

area

Occupation, built up area incl.

mineral extraction and dump sites resource m2a 8.09E-04 8.04E-04 0 0 5.37E-06 4.32E-04 4.29E-04 0 0 2.87E-06 1.13E-03 1.12E-03 0 0 5.37E-06 6.02E-04 5.99E-04 0 0 2.87E-06

Emissions to air
























Radon-222 air kBq 1.88E+01 1.86E+01 0 0 1.08E-01 1.00E+01 9.95E+00 0 0 5.78E-02 2.13E+01 2.11E+01 0 0 1.08E-01 1.13E+01 1.13E+01 0 0 5.78E-02


69


Emissions to water

















Emissions to Soil









70

electricity, photovoltaic, vertical facade,

sc-Si, integrated, Central Europe

electricity, photovoltaic, vertical facade, sc-

Si, integrated, Southern Europe

electricity, photovoltaic, vertical facade,

sc-Si, integrated, Central Europe)

electricity, photovoltaic, vertical facade, sc-

Si, integrated, Southern Europe

Total Construc

tion

Operati

on


ion

Operati

on


tion

Operati

on


tion

Operatio

n

Fuel Disposal

kWh kWh kWh kWh

Resources











Emissions to air













71













Radon-222 air kBq

3.15E+0

1 3.13E+01 0 0 1.81E-01 1.68E+01 1.67E+01 0 0 9.66E-02 3.60E+01 3.58E+01 0 0 1.81E-01 1.92E+01 1.91E+01 0 0 9.66E-02


Emissions to water














72





Emissions to Soil









73

5.2 Annex II – Minimum list of future photovoltaic scenarios

5.2.1 Very Optimistic scenario

Very Optimistic scenario 2025 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Construction Construction Operation Fuel Dismantling

Resources per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh

Coal, brown, in ground resource kg 3,53E-04 3,43E-04 1,35E+04 0 0 9,78E-06

Coal, hard, unspecified, in ground resource kg 1,37E-03 1,36E-03 5,38E+04 0 0 1,15E-05

Gas, natural, in ground resource Nm3 1,80E-03 1,77E-03 6,99E+04 0 0 3,13E-05

Oil, crude, in ground resource kg 9,76E-04 9,64E-04 3,81E+04 0 0 1,21E-05

Uranium, in ground resource kg 7,83E-08 7,63E-08 3,01E+00 0 0 1,99E-09

Freshwater (lake, river, groundwater) resource m3 1,07E-04 1,05E-04 4,16E+03 0 0 1,38E-06

Occupation, agricultural and forestal area resource m2a 3,99E-04 3,94E-04 1,56E+04 0 0 5,09E-06

Occupation, built up area incl. mineral extraction and dump sites resource m2a 5,13E-04 5,12E-04 2,02E+04 0 0 9,87E-07

Emissions to air

Ammonia air kg 2,36E-06 2,36E-06 9,30E+01 0 0 4,05E-09

Arsenic air kg 2,64E-08 2,64E-08 1,04E+00 0 0 5,66E-12

Cadmium air kg 8,89E-09 8,89E-09 3,51E-01 0 0 2,83E-12

Carbon dioxide, fossil air kg 8,85E-03 8,37E-03 3,30E+05 0 0 4,78E-04

Carbon monoxide, fossil air kg 1,37E-05 1,36E-05 5,36E+02 0 0 1,47E-07

Carbon-14 air kBq 1,53E-04 1,49E-04 5,87E+03 0 0 4,08E-06

Chromium air kg 6,63E-08 6,62E-08 2,62E+00 0 0 3,97E-11

Chromium VI air kg 1,64E-09 1,64E-09 6,46E-02 0 0 9,33E-13

Dinitrogen monoxide air kg 8,82E-07 8,71E-07 3,44E+01 0 0 1,04E-08

Iodine-129 air kBq 1,30E-07 1,26E-07 4,98E+00 0 0 3,49E-09

Lead air kg 1,52E-07 1,52E-07 6,01E+00 0 0 3,19E-11

Methane, fossil air kg 1,77E-05 1,74E-05 6,88E+02 0 0 2,39E-07

Mercury air kg 1,12E-09 1,12E-09 4,42E-02 0 0 3,89E-12

Nickel air kg 5,26E-08 5,26E-08 2,08E+00 0 0 2,99E-11

Nitrogen oxides air kg 2,47E-05 2,44E-05 9,64E+02 0 0 3,16E-07

NMVOC total air kg 1,98E-05 1,97E-05 7,76E+02 0 0 1,19E-07

thereof: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benzene air kg 3,16E-08 3,06E-08 1,21E+00 0 0 9,43E-10

Benzo(a)pyrene air kg 3,90E-10 3,90E-10 1,54E-02 0 0 1,61E-13

Formaldehyde air kg 9,90E-09 9,82E-09 3,88E-01 0 0 7,43E-11

PAH air kg 1,82E-08 1,81E-08 7,16E-01 0 0 1,55E-11

PM2.5-10 air kg 6,06E-06 6,05E-06 2,39E+02 0 0 9,10E-09

PM2.5 air kg 4,58E-06 4,56E-06 1,80E+02 0 0 1,78E-08

PCDD/F (measured as I-TEQ) air kg 1,03E-14 9,49E-15 3,75E-07 0 0 7,83E-16

Radon-222 air kBq 2,45E+00 2,38E+00 9,41E+07 0 0 6,45E-02

Sulfur dioxide air kg 3,82E-05 3,81E-05 1,50E+03 0 0 1,12E-07

Emissions to Water

Ammonium, ion water kg 3,41E-05 3,41E-05 1,34E+03 0 0 5,10E-10


74

Arsenic, ion water kg 1,93E-08 1,91E-08 7,53E-01 0 0 2,16E-10

Cadmium, ion water kg 4,02E-09 3,93E-09 1,55E-01 0 0 9,39E-11

Carbon-14 water kBq 5,19E-05 5,05E-05 1,99E+03 0 0 1,40E-06

Cesium-137 water kBq 2,42E-05 2,36E-05 9,32E+02 0 0 6,52E-07

Chromium, ion water kg 7,95E-10 7,71E-10 3,04E-02 0 0 2,40E-11

Chromium VI water kg 1,76E-07 1,75E-07 6,90E+00 0 0 8,25E-10

COD water kg 1,44E-04 1,42E-04 5,60E+03 0 0 1,77E-06

Copper, ion water kg 1,55E-07 1,31E-07 5,16E+00 0 0 2,46E-08

Lead water kg 3,82E-08 3,49E-08 1,38E+00 0 0 3,27E-09

Mercury water kg 6,60E-10 6,53E-10 2,58E-02 0 0 6,89E-12

Nickel, ion water kg 3,96E-07 3,94E-07 1,56E+01 0 0 2,25E-09

Nitrate water kg 1,51E-04 1,51E-04 5,97E+03 0 0 3,34E-08

Oils, unspecified water kg 2,72E-06 2,68E-06 1,06E+02 0 0 4,64E-08

PAH water kg 1,60E-09 1,59E-09 6,29E-02 0 0 4,99E-12

Phosphate water kg 9,41E-06 9,41E-06 3,72E+02 0 0 1,69E-09

Emissions to Soil

Arsenic soil kg 2,91E-10 2,91E-10 1,15E-02 0 0 1,81E-13

Cadmium soil kg 2,06E-10 2,06E-10 8,13E-03 0 0 3,11E-13

Chromium soil kg 8,93E-09 8,93E-09 3,52E-01 0 0 5,59E-12

Chromium VI soil kg 3,96E-09 3,88E-09 1,53E-01 0 0 7,93E-11

Lead soil kg 1,12E-08 1,12E-08 4,41E-01 0 0 1,65E-12

Mercury soil kg 2,01E-10 2,01E-10 7,92E-03 0 0 4,84E-16

Oils, unspecified soil kg 2,47E-06 2,42E-06 9,57E+01 0 0 4,63E-08

Very Optimistic scenario 2050 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Constructi

on Construction Operation Fuel Dismantling










Emissions to air


Arsenic air kg 2,63E-09 2,62E-09 1,47E-01 0 0 3,93E-12









75


Lead air kg 1,97E-08 1,97E-08 1,10E+00 0 0 1,75E-11



Nickel air kg 6,20E-09 6,19E-09 3,47E-01 0 0 1,32E-11



thereof: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Benzene air kg 1,54E-08 1,51E-08 8,47E-01 0 0 2,82E-10



PAH air kg 6,62E-09 6,60E-09 3,70E-01 0 0 1,55E-11

PM2.5-10 air kg 5,72E-06 5,71E-06 3,20E+02 0 0 5,30E-09

PM2.5 air kg 3,06E-06 3,05E-06 1,71E+02 0 0 6,84E-09


Radon-222 air kBq 7,89E-01 6,98E-01 3,92E+07 0 0 9,14E-02


Emissions to Water








COD water kg 3,55E-05 3,39E-05 1,90E+03 0 0 1,59E-06







PAH water kg 1,70E-09 1,69E-09 9,51E-02 0 0 1,88E-12


Emissions to Soil





Lead soil kg 1,54E-09 1,54E-09 8,66E-02 0 0 3,87E-13



5.2.2 Realistic Optimistic scenario

Realistic Optimistic scenario 2025 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Constructi





76








Emissions to air











Lead air kg 1,67E-07 1,67E-07 6,59E+00 0 0 3,74E-11






thereof:




PAH air kg 1,85E-08 1,85E-08 7,30E-01 0 0 1,60E-11

PM2.5-10 air kg 6,19E-06 6,18E-06 2,44E+02 0 0 9,27E-09

PM2.5 air kg 4,93E-06 4,91E-06 1,94E+02 0 0 1,85E-08




Emissions to Water








COD water kg 1,45E-04 1,43E-04 5,65E+03 0 0 1,78E-06




77





PAH water kg 1,62E-09 1,62E-09 6,38E-02 0 0 5,06E-12


Emissions to Soil





Lead soil kg 1,12E-08 1,12E-08 4,41E-01 0 0 1,68E-12



Realistic Optimistic scenario 2050 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Constructi











Emissions to air


Arsenic air kg 1,11E-08 1,11E-08 6,23E-01 0 0 3,36E-12









Lead air kg 5,86E-08 5,86E-08 3,29E+00 0 0 1,59E-11







78

thereof: 0 0 0 0 0 0




PAH air kg 1,10E-08 1,09E-08 6,14E-01 0 0 9,55E-12

PM2.5-10 air kg 6,95E-06 6,94E-06 3,90E+02 0 0 4,88E-09

PM2.5 air kg 3,93E-06 3,92E-06 2,20E+02 0 0 8,22E-09




Emissions to Water


Arsenic, ion water kg 1,98E-08 1,96E-08 1,11E+00 0 0 2,13E-10






COD water kg 7,19E-05 7,01E-05 4,03E+03 0 0 1,82E-06







PAH water kg 1,85E-09 1,85E-09 1,04E-01 0 0 2,37E-12


Emissions to Soil





Lead soil kg 5,08E-09 5,08E-09 2,85E-01 0 0 8,06E-13



5.2.3 Pessimistic scenario

Pessimistic scenario 2025 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Constructi







79






Emissions to air











Lead air kg 3,77E-07 3,77E-07 1,49E+01 0 0 6,15E-11






thereof: 0 0 0 0 0 0




PAH air kg 3,40E-08 3,40E-08 1,34E+00 0 0 2,31E-11

PM2.5-10 air kg 1,06E-05 1,06E-05 4,17E+02 0 0 1,46E-08

PM2.5 air kg 8,52E-06 8,49E-06 3,35E+02 0 0 3,10E-08




Emissions to Water


Arsenic, ion water kg 3,95E-08 3,91E-08 1,54E+00 0 0 3,93E-10






COD water kg 3,79E-04 3,75E-04 1,48E+04 0 0 3,32E-06






80



PAH water kg 3,06E-09 3,05E-09 1,21E-01 0 0 8,69E-12


Emissions to Soil





Lead soil kg 2,87E-08 2,87E-08 1,13E+00 0 0 3,40E-12



Pessimistic scenario 2050 Typical PV application (average technology and location)

Total Constructi











Emissions to air











Lead air kg 1,88E-07 1,88E-07 1,05E+01 0 0 4,21E-11






thereof: 0 0 0 0 0 0



81



PAH air kg 1,68E-08 1,67E-08 9,39E-01 0 0 1,84E-11

PM2.5-10 air kg 5,27E-06 5,26E-06 2,95E+02 0 0 9,96E-09

PM2.5 air kg 4,31E-06 4,29E-06 2,41E+02 0 0 2,33E-08




Emissions to Water








COD water kg 1,14E-04 1,13E-04 6,33E+03 0 0 1,46E-06







PAH water kg 7,13E-10 7,09E-10 3,98E-02 0 0 4,61E-12


Emissions to Soil





Lead soil kg 1,06E-08 1,06E-08 5,97E-01 0 0 1,85E-12



deliverable n° 11.2 - rs ia “final report on technical ... d11.2 final report... · 2.3.2 main...

Documents