Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:13:42.655Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Suitability of Atmospheric-pressure MOCVD CdTe Solar Cells for Inline Production Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Vincent Barrioz ,
Dan A Lamb ,
Eurig W. Jones  and
Stuart Irvine
Vincent Barrioz
Affiliation:
[email protected], OpTIC Technium - Glyndŵr University, Centre for Solar Energy Research, St Asaph, United Kingdom
Dan A Lamb
Affiliation:
[email protected], OpTIC Technium - Glyndŵr University, Centre for Solar Energy Research, St Asaph, United Kingdom
Eurig W. Jones
Affiliation:
[email protected], OpTIC Technium - Glyndŵr University, Centre for Solar Energy Research, St Asaph, United Kingdom
Stuart Irvine
Affiliation:
[email protected], OpTIC Technium - Glyndŵr University, Centre for Solar Energy Research, St Asaph, United Kingdom
Get access

Abstract

CdTe, with a direct band gap of 1.45 eV is well suited to the terrestrial AM1.5 solar irradiance and currently makes up half of the thin film (TF) photovoltaic (PV) market. There are 4 main factors that determine final cost of PV modules: the conversion efficiency, materials amount per unit area of module, production yield, and the economy of scale. It is therefore valuable to investigate alternative and/or innovative deposition techniques and processes which have the potential to impact on these factors. Metal organic chemical vapour deposition (MOCVD) is a powerful technique offering increased process repeatability, achieving a high level of control of materials characteristics. Recent improvements in CdTe devices using atmospheric–pressure (AP) MOCVD have led to efficiencies of 13.3 % using 2 μm absorber layers and 11 % with a 1 μm absorber layer [11, 12]. These results were achieved: by extending the optical band gap of the window layer, using a ternary alloy (Cd0.9Zn0.1S), with intentional p-type doping of the CdTe layers with As, and the use of an in situ (dry) deposited CdCl2 layer and anneal. All layers, except the front and back contact, are grown by a sequential MOCVD process. Furthermore this is a dry process without the need for any etch treatment. The inherent design of the horizontal MOCVD laboratory chambers do not lend themselves well to large scale production. However, the CSER group has designed and built an experimental inline reaction chamber to evaluate AP-MOCVD as an inline production process. Discussion is made based on kinetically limited growth and molar supply models to assess the suitability of the MOCVD process to deposit fast enough for an inline process. The AP-MOCVD inline reactor uses a showerhead to deliver the precursors onto a moving 5 × 7.5 cm2 substrate and preliminary results for deposited layers are given. From these preliminary results it has been extrapolated that a 1 μm thick CdTe layer can be deposited on substrates moving at 60 cm/min.

Keywords

II-VIkineticsphotovoltaic
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1165: Symposium M – Thin-Film Compound Semiconductor Photovoltaics–2009 , 2009 , 1165-M07-03
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Pearce, J.M. Renewable Energy 33, 1101(2008).Google Scholar
2. The information Network, Solar, Autumn 1, 13(2008).Google Scholar
3. Bonnet, D. and Rabenhorst, H. Proceedings of the 9th Photovoltaic Spec. Conf., 129 (1972).Google Scholar
4. Upadhyaya, H.M. Razykov, T.M. and Tiwari, A.N. “Handbook of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy” edited by Kreith, F. Goswami, D.Y. (CRC Press) (2007), 23–45.Google Scholar
5. Wu, X. Keane, J. C. Dhere, R. G. Dehert, C. Albin, D. S. Dude, A. Gessert, T. A. Asher, S. Levi, D. H. and Sheldon, P. Proceedings of the 17th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, Munich, Germany, vol. II, 995 (2001).Google Scholar
6. Stan, M. Aiken, D. Cho, B. Cornfeld, A. Diaz, J. Ley, V. Korostyshevsky, A. Patel, P. Sharps, P. Varghese, T. J. Crystal Growth 310, 5204(2008).Google Scholar
7. Aberle, A.G. Thin Solid Films (2009) (doi: 10.1016/j.tsf.2009.03.056).Google Scholar
8. Nouhi, A. Meyers, P.V. Stirn, R.J. and Liu, C.H. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 7(3), 833 (1989).Google Scholar
9. Chou, H.C. Rohatgi, A. J. Electronic Mat. 23(1), 31 (1994).Google Scholar
10. Berrigan, R.A. Maung, N. Irvine, S.J.C. Cole-Hamilton, D.J. and Ellis, D. J. Crystal Growth 195, 718(1998).Google Scholar
11. Irvine, S.J.C. Barrioz, V. Lamb, D. Jones, E.W. and Rowlands-Jones, R.L., J. Crystal Growth 310 (23), 5198 (2008).Google Scholar
12. Jones, E.W. Barrioz, V. Irvine, S.J.C. and Lamb, D. Thin Solid Films 517 (7), 2226 (2009).Google Scholar
13. Barrioz, V. Proskuryakov, Y. Jones, E.W. Major, J. Irvine, S.J.C. Durose, K. and Lamb, D. Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 1012, Y12–08 (2007).Google Scholar
14. Barrioz, V. Irvine, S.J.C. Jones, E.W. Rowlands, R.L. Lamb, D.A. Thin Solid Films 515(15), 5808 (2007).Google Scholar
15. Barrioz, V. Lamb, D.A. Jones, E.W. Proskuryakov, Y.Y. Irvine, S.J.C. and Durose, K. 23rd European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 1-5 September, Valencia, Spain, 2186 (2008).Google Scholar
16. Stringfellow, G.B. “Organometallic vapor-phase epitaxy: theory and practice”, 2nd Ed. Academic Press (1999) 211. Google Scholar
17. Irvine, S.J.C. and Bajaj, J. J. Crystal Growth 145, 74(1994).Google Scholar
18. Irvine, S.J.C. Hartley, A. and Stafford, A. J. Crystal Growth 221, 117(2000)Google Scholar
19. Irvine, S.J.C. Mullin, J.B. Hill, H. Brown, G.T. and Barnett, S.J. J. Crystal Growth 86, 188(1988).Google Scholar
20. Amin, N. Sopian, K. and Konagai, M. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 91, 1202(2007).Google Scholar