Thin Film PV

Around 40% of the PV capacity in India has opted for thin film modules. This accounts to around 750 MW of supply to India. Here PV Insider’s Ritesh Gupta finds how thin film technology performance has shaped up and what to expect in the future.

Ever since the Indian government launched the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) in January 2010, the solar industry in India has garnered regular attention.

The mission has targeted a capacity of grid connected solar power generation of 1000 MW within three years of its launch and to reach installed power capacity of 10,000 MW by the year 2017.

As for the way solar PV has shaped up, Jasmeet Khurana, head – market intelligence, Bridge To India Energy, says, “Around 40% of the PV capacity in India has opted for thin film modules. This accounts to around 750 MW of supply to India.” Of this capacity, First Solar has been able to supply around 350 MW, giving the company the largest market share.

However, as Khurana says, if one observes the pattern, around 65% of the NSM (National Solar Mission) projects are using thin film modules as compared to only around 35% for the non-NSM projects. “A key reason for this is that NSM had a domestic content requirement (DCR) on crystalline modules and the developers preferred to opt for international thin-film modules over domestic crystalline modules. Also, developers were able to avail cheaper finance while buying thin-film modules from the US,” he says.

Importantly, as Khurana points out, it should be noted that unlike phase one of the NSM, the new DCR (domestic content requirements) under phase two of the NSM give no particular advantage to thin-film modules. Also, due to the volatility in the Indian currency, the hedging costs have gone up, making international financing less attractive. “We expect the overall market share of thin-film in India to come down due to these reasons,” he says.

The state policies have no mandatory DCR, according to Khurana. The NSM now mandates that a capacity of 375 MW out of the 750 MW of projects will come under DCR. However, unlike the first phase, there will be no restriction on procuring crystalline modules from outside India for the remaining 375 MW. Khurana says therefore, unlike in the previous phase, there is no clear advantage to thin-film because of DCR. Overall, DCR will only be applicable for 350 MW out of the more than 2 GW capacity that will be under development in India next year between the NSM, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Rajasthan.

Performance

The thin film technology is performing slightly better than the crystalline technology owing to the hot climatic conditions in India, says Parag Shah , managing partner, Mahindra Partners.

“However, there are variations observed in thin film technology performance. Our experience is that the quality of the manufacturer and not the technology alone makes the difference.” Mahindra’s joint venture with Kiran Energy, Mahindra Solar One, was the first to gain non-recourse rupee finance for the 5MW JNNSM project.

Khurana says as of now, thin film technology is faring well in India. “For the first year of operation, in Gujarat, the projects that were built using thin film modules have an average capacity utilisation factor (CUF) of 19.6% as compared to a CUF of 18.5% for crystalline technology. This is in line with the expectation that thin film modules perform better in high temperature conditions.

“However, the analysis is shallow at this stage as it does not take into account a lot of other factors and the timeframe and accuracy of the data is also limited. It might be too early to conclude that thin film projects can give a better yield through the lifetime of project. Also, the degradation factors between these technologies can vary considerably,” he says.

From a user’s perspective, Basant Jain, CEO, Mahindra Solar, says, “The thin film technology normally should deliver about 5 % to 6% additional generation compared to crystalline technology. We have also witnessed the same in some of our plants. However there have been cases where crystalline has also performed superior. Rather than generalising about technology, we as a company believe in choosing the right quality module supplier which determines the capacity utilisation of the plant.”

Installations

Explaining the typical size of plants and associated thin film PV technology in these plants here, REECODE Energy Solutions’ CEO Bhupesh Trivedi says there is no clear differentiation in terms of size – plants with capacities ranging from 1 MW to upwards of 25 MW have used thin film modules. The two major contributing factors are: (a) the installation of a large number of projects in the high-temperature zones of Gujarat and Rajasthan, and (b) suppliers’ credit/ US Exim Bank loans that manufacturers have been able to arrange.

According to Khurana, the average project size in India for all installations to date is around 7 MW. The average size for projects using thin film modules is around 10 MW. “From this data, you could presume that larger projects tend to use thin film modules. However, if you look at the data at a project level, this co-relation might not be very accurate. As most projects in India are ground mounted, I would actually conclude that there is little or no co-relation between size of the project and the selection of module technology,” he says.

Procuring

There has been talk about solar project developers here being lured via low-interest loans and in turn buying requisite equipment, panels and cells from companies based outside the country. Khurana says this is only true to a certain extent.

“While some project developers have benefitted from the low interest rates, some others have opted for thin-film modules without availing international finance. International finance has been one of the factors which has influenced the higher market share of thin-film in India but I would not say that it has been the only factor. Technology differentiation, domestic content requirements, cheaper international financing and to some extent even herd mentality; all these factors have had their role to play,” he says.

Khurana also points out that until last year, international module suppliers were selling below cost as they were desperate to clear their inventories. He adds that they were also more than willing to facilitate cheaper finance through banks in their home countries.

“Indian manufacturers were uncompetitive in that environment and the way DCR was formulated, it did not help anyone except the international thin film suppliers. However, the global supply situation is different now. Consolidation has taken place and Japan is absorbing a lot of capacity. Also, international financing with hedging is not that attractive anymore. Therefore, I do not think that cheaper international finance is a key criteria for any purchase decisions anymore,” he says.

A section of the industry also believes that in general, no module manufacturer is offering any customisations specific for India. However, if a module supplier is able to offer customisations such as an anti-dust coating, it can be a good proposition. However, as India is a price sensitive market, any additional cost has to be justifiable in terms of an increase in power production due to the enhancement/ customisation.

Also, manufacturing in India is yet to be firmly established. In fact, talking about thin film sector in India, Trivedi saysit is almost “non-existent with no local manufacturer”.

He believes that on the generation side, the acceptance of thin film modules has been high and will continue to remain so. “One major favouring factor now is the historic power generation data from grid-connected power plants. The figures are so far skewed in favour of thin film modules. However, I would like to emphasise that it is a little early to get judgemental on the issue. We are yet to observe and evaluate module degradation,” he says.