Improving energy yield in photovoltaic modules with photonic structures
When installed outdoors, Si solar cells typically operate 20 – 30 K above ambient conditions. These elevated operating temperatures lead to diminished performance, reducing efficiency by ~0.4%/K for crystalline Si cells and decreasing module lifetime. Since much of the elevated temperature of the modules derives from parasitic absorption of sub-bandgap sunlight by the contacts, encapsulants, or other materials, reflectors that remove the sub-bandgap radiation from the module before it is absorbed promise to reduce the operating temperature. However, there are many competing strategies to reject this light: selective reflectors could be integrated into the outer module glass, at the textured Si-encapsulant interface, or on the rear. Furthermore, many of these approaches are complex and expensive to fabricate. The issue of heating can be even more critical in bifacial modules: high fractions of rear irradiance can lead to higher operating temperatures. Prior to this project, relatively little was known about the optical strategies for temperature reduction in bifacial modules. The goal of this project was to quantitatively assess optical strategies for improving the energy yield via a combination of improved anti-reflection and sub-bandgap light rejection. We studied two complementary concepts: the performance of ideal structures to determine the upper limits to performance, and low-complexity structures made from standard materials as cost-effective implementations. We also studied the performance of these reflectors in different types of modules, including Al BSF, PERC, and bifacial. Here we build from our prior accomplishments in developing mirror optimization techniques, and make use of simulation methods that accurately capture the optical properties of the modules throughout the visible and near-infrared spectrum. We connect these optical properties to energy yield under realistic, outdoor conditions. We also experimentally fabricated mirrors, incorporated them into mini-modules, and performed outdoor testing of performance at NREL. We found definitively that spectrally-selective mirrors on the outside of the module cover glass offer the best performance, both under ideal conditions and for realistic, low- complexity mirrors. Mirrors at the Si cell/encapsulant interface are limited by the multiple reflections needed to remove sub-bandgap light. Mirrors at the cell surface and mirrors on the rear also cannot remove all the sub-bandgap light, since parasitic absorption also occurs in the cover glass, encapsulant, and front contacts, depending on the module configuration. Also, cell texturing places higher demands on any cell-surface mirror because multiple interactions with the mirror are required to reject sub bandgap light which compounds losses. For bifacial modules, mirrors on the back do provide additional cooling and energy yield improvements, and the mirrors can have the same structure. In the monofacial case up to 3.3K of cooling is possible for mirrors on the front, compared to 2.2K at the cell surface and 1.2K at the rear. For bifacial modules, up to 2.4K of cooling is possible when mirrors are included at both the front and back. Our realistic designs utilize 4 – 6 layers of common photovoltaic materials such as SiO 2 , TiO 2 , and SiN x , making them more cost effective. Finally, we used our models to study thermal management in bifacial modules with different back lamination materials, finding that glass-glass laminated modules operated hotter than equivalent glass-polymer backsheet modules, due solely to the increased absorption of light incident from the rear of the module. Improving the energy yield by 2%, which is achievable with these realistic designs, would lead to LCOE reductions of $0.03/kWh by 2030. These benefits make photovoltaic panels more accessible to the public and may reduce associated maintenance costs.