NanoMarkets

www.nanomarkets.net

Materials, Applications and Opportunities

within Organic Photovoltaics– 2011
Nano-346

Published April 2011

© NanoMarkets, LC

NanoMarkets, LC
PO Box 3840
Glen Allen, VA 23058
Tel: 804-360-2967
Web: www.nanomarkets.net

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

Money continues to be invested in the OPV space and new companies have appeared in the
past year or so. This is despite the fact that conversion efficiencies remain well below those of
every other PV technology and OPV costs have failed to meet the expectations of a few years
back.

In this brand new report from NanoMarkets the firm provides a comprehensive examination Page | 1
of the marketplace, technologies, manufacturing approaches and the overall current state of
the OPV business. Starting with a look back over the past year, we examine both key
materials suppliers and panel manufacturers and the applications for their products. We
consider how revenues will be profitably generated by this interesting technology over the
near and longer term. The report contains detailed forecasts broken out by materials,
technologies and markets by volumes and dollars.

The report is scheduled for release in April of 2011.

Table of Contents:

Executive Summary
E.1 Changes in the past year
E.1.1 New developments in materials
E.1.2 New OPV product offerings
E.2 Can OPV ever make money?
E.3 Firms to Watch
E.4 Summary of eight-year forecasts

Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Background to this report
1.2 Objectives and scope of this report
1.3 Methodology of this report
1.4 Plan of this report

Chapter Two: Impact of Materials, Manufacturing and Cell Architecture Development on the
Prospects for OPV
2.1 Current and future OPV efficiency/performance achievements
2.1.1 Champion cells
2.1.2 Commercial cells
2.2 Materials and manufacturing innovations as a way forward in OPV
2.2.1 Printing: will it ever lower costs?
2.2.1 Hybrid approaches and the use of nanomaterials in OPV
2.2.3 Prospects for the use of advanced encapsulation systems in OPV.
2.3 Key Points Made in this Chapter

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

Chapter Three: OPV Supplier Structure

3.1 Materials suppliers
3.1.1 Agfa
3.1.2 BASF
3.1.3 Heraeus
3.1.4 Merck Page | 2
3.1.5 Plextronics
3.2 Cell/panel suppliers
3.2.1 Eight19
3.2.2 Global Photonic Energy
3.2.3 Heliatek
3.2.4 Konarka
3.2.5 Mitsubishi
3.2.6 Solar Press
3.2.7 Solarmer

Chapter Four: OPV Markets and Forecasts

4.1 Forecasting Methodology
4.1.1 Data Sources
4.1.2 Scope of Forecast
4.2 OPV as a platform for BIPV
4.2.1 Eight-year forecast of OPV-based BIPV
4.3 OPV and the solar charger market
4.3.1 Eight-year forecast of OPV-based BIPV
4.4 OPV and other markets
4.4.1 Solar calculators
4.4.2 Power for signage
4.4.3 Textiles and tarps
4.4.4 OPV and energy harvesting
4.4.5 Eight-year forecast of other OPV markets
4.5 Eight-year forecast of OPV materials by type
4.6 Summary of Forecasts
4.7 Alternative scenarios

For additional information about this report please visit our website at
www.nanomarkets.net or contact us at sales@nanomarkets.net or (804) 270-4370

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Background to this Report

Organic photovoltaics (OPV) continues to enjoy considerable interest, despite the fact that its
basic value proposition from a few years back has been significantly challenged. Seven or Page | 3
eight years ago, advocates of OPV would list a string of advantages that OPV could bring to
the table that would ultimately give it a large market. These included low-cost, flexibility and
ability to work at an acceptable efficiency in low light. It was also promised that pitifully low
conversion efficiencies of the time would improve and that even if they never got anywhere
close to what the best of c-Si PV and inorganic thin-film PV could offer, the other advantages
would make up for it. And then there was the encapsulation problem, organic materials and
some of the electrode materials used for OPV do not do well when exposed to oxygen and
water vapor. For a while, this seemed to be a problem that was little discussed and one was
given the impression that OPV advocates believed that it would just melt away.

The way things have worked out in the past few years, all of the above is beginning to look a
bit naïve. OPV has not kept its promise on low cost; the lowest cost PV around at the present
time is almost certainly the CdTe PV being produced by First Solar. Perhaps OPV could reach
similar costs if it could be produced in the same massive volumes that First Solar produces its
panels. But at the current—and likely future—efficiencies, nobody is going to build a huge
OPV plant; there just isn’t the addressable market there to justify it.

The other factors that are listed above in OPV’s favor look more promising, but with important
caveats. OPV is inherently flexible, but so are other forms of PV; notably DSC and CIGS. And
DSC and CIGS again have much higher conversion efficiencies. DSC can also compete with
OPV on the ability to operate in low light. Encapsulation is now getting better, but at a cost; a
cost that OPV cannot afford.

1.1.1 Can OPV Get Serious: What Will It Take for OPV to Compete in the
BIPV Space?
Given all of the above, it seems that the immediate future of OPV is set. The best that can be
hoped for is that OPV will cater to applications that are not especially cost sensitive and where
the ability to operate in less than bright light is paramount. Essentially, what we are talking
about here are portable solar battery chargers in one form or another. These may be
standalone products or may be disguised as solar handbags or solar umbrellas designed to
charge cell phones, MP3 players, etc. NanoMarkets believes these are real markets—that is,
they are not merely fanciful. Military users, mountain climbers and serious hikers can—and
do—make use of this kind of solar battery charger, but such applications should be considered

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

a niche. Solar handbags and the like are even more niche-like. A key aspect of all of these
markets is that the amount of PV material they consume per finished product is quite small,
especially compared to what would be consumed in the case of a full-sized solar panel.

All this means that players in the OPV space have to decide for themselves whether the kind
of marginal markets mentioned above can yield them an acceptable profit or whether it is Page | 4
realistic to expect that they will ultimately give way to bigger things; that is, regular solar
panels based on OPV. More specifically, since we think that OPV is going to have a hard time
competing with every other commercialized PV technology in the conventional panel space,
the opportunity for OPV is more likely to be found in the BIPV space, where OPV panel makers
can exploit the ability of OPV to work reasonably well in low-light conditions. Here OPV
competes with DSC, but bests existing inorganic PV.

In this report, NanoMarkets discusses the ability of OPV to segue into being a serious
contender in the BIPV space. Much will depend here on costs and the ability of OPV to
perform better. Since no one is expecting OPV to come close to the performance of more
conventional PV technologies, much lower costs will be an important trade off to make OPV
viable in the PV space.

1.1.2 Prospects for Lowering the Costs and Raising the

Performance of OPV
On the face of it OPV should be able to enjoy a steep price decline. OPV is, after all, made
from plastic and does not use the rare metals used for most inorganic TFPV; germanium,
tellurium, and indium are especially troubling in this regard and we also note that while silicon
is not expensive as a material, bulky silicon wafers for c-Si PV, most certainly are. While the
costs of OPV may never go down to the levels that were once forecast for it, it is not
unrealistic to suppose that they could get down to much lower levels than where they are
today. A relative decline when compared to CIGS and CdTe seems almost certain.

In the past year or so, we have begun to see some interesting developments at the materials
level that speaks well for the ability of OPV to improve on performance. The “mainstream”—
as much as that term can be used for OPV—active materials for OPV have been P3HT and
PCBM. But Heliatek, which has taken a small-molecule approach, has reported impressive
results, certified 8.3 percent efficiency. Mitsubishi’s small-molecule approach uses
benzoporphyrin and solution processing, but performance has not been certified—although
the company claims 8.5 percent efficiency. This is still a long way from what is needed for
OPV to make a serious dent in the BIPV market, but is certainly moving in the right direction.

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

There are also interesting developments in the alternative polymer space. Thus Plextronics
claims that its polymer Plexcore inks perform 30-40 percent better than P3HT. And Solarmer
claims that it used “new polymers” in achieving its 8.13 percent efficient champion cell.
Konarka is the only company that has already achieved what could be considered “high”
volume for OPV, and it did it with P3HT/PCBM—a material combination that seems to have
Page | 5
fallen out of favor with the other players. But it has achieved an 8.3 percent champion cell
efficiency, which isn’t bad.

There are also opportunities for cost savings with the “peripheral” materials that are used in
OPV. For example, the C60 fullerene derivatives that are most often used for acceptor
materials are not especially inexpensive at the present time, but it seems almost inevitable
that they will come down in cost over the next few years, as, along with their cousins, carbon
nanotubes and graphene, they go into widespread production mode. In addition, many
premium materials are still used in significant quantities—materials like ITO for front
electrodes and silver for back ones—and present opportunities for savings.

Finally, there is the likelihood that costs can be lowered for OPV by using low-cost printing for
deposition and patterning. This still seems like a possibility in the long run. But we note that
up until now, it has proven difficult to accomplish. However, if Konarka can achieve its
runrates using modified film printing equipment it is reasonable to expect that specialized
equipment would produce even higher runrates—and lower costs.

1.2 Objectives and Scope of this Report

The purpose of this report is to examine the opportunities and challenges for OPV. The
analysis of the materials markets has been a unique advantage of NanoMarkets' reports and
that analysis is included in this report along with the analysis of the underlying device
markets. That is, in addition to identifying the opportunities and evaluating the growth
prospects for OPV devices, we also perform a similar analysis on each of the major types of
materials used in their manufacture.

These materials include the critical components of the cells and modules: substrates; donor,
acceptor, and hole and electron transport materials; transparent and nontransparent
electrode materials; and encapsulation materials. Other materials are also discussed where
they bear unique and important relevance to the devices and markets covered in this report.
We do not go beyond the module to the circuitry and structural materials that interconnect
the modules to one another or to the other external materials and equipment that are often
used in PV installations.

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

We acknowledge that for OPV, the "module" may skirt the definitions of modules that apply
to more conventional photovoltaics. Here we are using the term "module" in the most
general sense of the term, as the unit of self-contained photovoltaic devices, consisting of one
or more cells. Thus, in focusing our materials analysis on the modules we also do not include
materials for the bags, umbrellas, tents, and others in which some of these devices are
Page | 6
incorporated. The device markets are considered in light of the various applications they are
targeted toward. These include BIPV panels plus the powered bags, umbrellas, and tents.

One part of our goal in covering the markets for OPV devices and materials is to provide
detailed forecasts of the markets for them. This includes separate forecasts for the materials
and devices themselves, broken down by application.

1.3 Methodology of this Report

The information for this report is derived from a variety of sources, but principally comes from
primary sources, including NanoMarkets' ongoing interview program of technologists and
marketing/business development managers, involved with emerging electronics and energy
sources of all kinds, including photovoltaics and thin-film and organic electronics. We also
drew on an extensive search of the technical literature, relevant company Web sites, trade
journals, government resources, and various collateral items from trade shows and
conferences.

All of the factors and uncertainties mentioned above make it difficult to reliably quantify the
markets for OPV devices and materials; nonetheless that is what we have attempted to do. In
Chapter Four, we explain in more depth our forecasting methodology, our approach to these
uncertainties, and alternative scenarios we have considered in making the forecasts.

The basic approach taken to forecasting is to identify and quantify the underlying needs and
markets that can be served by OPV; consider the specifics of the device technologies and the
types of products available or under development; and assess the competitive landscape to
determine the suitability and likely volume of OPV devices over the next eight years. Given
these volume projections, we also assess the types and quantities of each of the materials
used by the devices. The stated plans of the key firms are of course of special interest,
although NanoMarkets critically considers these claims in light of all available data.

This report is international in scope. The forecasts herein are worldwide forecasts and we
have not been geographically selective in the firms that we have covered in this report or
interviewed in order to collect information.

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259
NanoMarkets
www.nanomarkets.net

1.4 Plan of this Report

In Chapter Two, we discuss OPV materials including the latest technical and marketing
developments. We also examine how OPV is currently shaping up against other kinds of PV
technology against which it must compete. The contents of this chapter also includes profiles
of the leading suppliers of the materials used in OPV and an analysis of their product market Page | 7
strategies as well as an assessment of how those strategies are likely to impact the OPV
market as a whole.

In Chapter Three, we examine the OPV products that are beginning to enter the marketplace.
In this chapter we consider all levels of the OPV value chain from firms that essentially do
soon-to-be commercialized R&D on OPV cells, to firms that provide value-added products that
use OPV as their key power technology

Chapter Four contains our eight-year forecasts of the markets for OPV devices as well as the
materials used in them. We have broken out these product types by applications in the case
of OPV devices and by materials types in the case of materials.

NanoMarkets, LC | PO Box 3840 | Glen Allen, VA 23058 | TEL: 804-360-2967 | FAX: 804-360-7259