| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
| 1.1. | Current landscape of solar PV |
| 1.2. | Could the thin film market share increase? |
| 1.3. | Thin film PV technologies covered in this report (I) |
| 1.4. | Motivation for thin film solar cells |
| 1.5. | Thin film PV technologies covered in this report |
| 1.6. | Typical commercial efficiencies of existing PV technologies |
| 1.7. | Photovoltaics technology readiness status |
| 1.8. | Commercial opportunity for PV technologies |
| 1.9. | Comparing thin film technologies (i) |
| 1.10. | Comparing thin film technologies (ii) |
| 1.11. | CdTe PV suffers from raw material concerns |
| 1.12. | Key CIGS player exited the market in June 2022 |
| 1.13. | The future of GaAs PV? |
| 1.14. | Amorphous silicon PV experiencing market decline |
| 1.15. | Technological transition improves organic PV efficiency and stability |
| 1.16. | Readiness of organic PV materials and opportunities |
| 1.17. | Perovskite PV - rapid efficiency growth |
| 1.18. | Drivers for perovskite PV |
| 1.19. | Comparison of thin film deposition methods |
| 1.20. | Thin film PV industry adoption of deposition methods |
| 1.21. | Key takeaways (i) |
| 1.22. | Key takeaways (ii) |
| 1.23. | Key takeaways (iii) |
| 1.24. | Thin film PV annual revenue |
| 2. | INTRODUCTION |
| 2.1. | Solar energy is the fastest growing energy source |
| 2.2. | Current landscape of solar PV |
| 2.3. | Motivation for thin film solar cells |
| 2.4. | Thin film PV technologies covered in this report (i) |
| 2.5. | Thin film PV technologies covered in this report (ii) |
| 2.6. | Could the thin film market share increase? |
| 2.7. | Typical commercial efficiencies of existing PV technologies |
| 2.8. | Comparing thin film technologies (i) |
| 2.9. | Comparing thin film technologies (ii) |
| 2.10. | Photovoltaics technology status |
| 2.11. | Typical cost of PV technologies |
| 2.12. | Silicon processing is costly and time intensive |
| 2.13. | Thin film PV benefits from greater vertical integration |
| 2.14. | How does a thin film solar cell work? |
| 2.15. | Key solar cell performance metrics |
| 2.16. | Breakdown of following chapters |
| 3. | MARKET FORECASTS |
| 3.1. | Forecasting methodology |
| 3.2. | Forecasting module costs |
| 3.3. | Total installed PV capacity forecast |
| 3.4. | Thin film PV annual production forecast |
| 3.5. | Thin film annual revenue |
| 3.6. | Thin film annual revenue (excluding CdTe) |
| 3.7. | Module costs |
| 3.8. | Cumulative installed solar farm capacity |
| 3.9. | Annual surface area production - solar farms |
| 3.10. | Solar farm annual revenue |
| 3.11. | Solar farm annual revenue (excluding CdTe) |
| 3.12. | Cumulative installed BIPV capacity |
| 3.13. | Annual surface area production - BIPV |
| 3.14. | BIPV annual revenue |
| 3.15. | PV module costs for wireless electronics |
| 3.16. | Production forecast for PV-powered wireless electronics |
| 3.17. | Annual revenue for PV in wireless electronics |
| 4. | EMERGING THIN FILM PHOTOVOLTAICS |
| 4.1. | Overview |
| 4.1.1. | Introduction to emerging thin film PV |
| 4.1.2. | Emerging thin film PV technology status |
| 4.2. | Dye Sensitised Photovoltaics |
| 4.2.1. | Introduction to dye sensitized solar cells |
| 4.2.2. | How does a DSSC work? |
| 4.2.3. | Carbon more practical than platinum as counter electrode |
| 4.2.4. | Opportunities to enhance DSSC electrolyte |
| 4.2.5. | Emerging alternatives to electrolyte solution for DSSC |
| 4.2.6. | Exeger: Utilizing DSSC to harvest energy for consumer goods |
| 4.2.7. | Value propositions of DSSC PV for indoor energy harvesting of consumer devices |
| 4.2.8. | Exeger's partnerships show promising future of DSSCs |
| 4.2.9. | DSSC-powered AR/VR headsets? |
| 4.2.10. | Solaronix - DSSC materials provider turning to perovskites |
| 4.2.11. | Innovation opportunities within DSSCs |
| 4.2.12. | Porter's Five Forces: DSSC PV Market |
| 4.2.13. | SWOT: Dye sensitised PV |
| 4.2.14. | Key Takeaways: DSSCs |
| 4.3. | Organic Photovoltaics |
| 4.3.1. | Introduction to organic PV |
| 4.3.2. | OPV: How does it work? |
| 4.3.3. | Advantages of organic PV relative to conventional silicon PV(i) |
| 4.3.4. | Advantages of organic PV relative to conventional silicon PV (ii) |
| 4.3.5. | Significant lag between lab and industry |
| 4.3.6. | Key players in the OPV industry |
| 4.3.7. | Porter's Five Forces: Organic PV Market |
| 4.3.8. | SWOT: Organic PV |
| 4.4. | Organic PV Materials Opportunities |
| 4.4.1. | Types of organic PV materials |
| 4.4.2. | Organic materials: Molecules vs polymers |
| 4.4.3. | Technological transition improves organic PV efficiency and stability |
| 4.4.4. | Benefits of non-fullerene acceptors in OPV (i) |
| 4.4.5. | Benefits of non-fullerene acceptors in OPV (ii) |
| 4.4.6. | Examples of non-fullerene acceptors |
| 4.4.7. | Tuneable band gaps make OPV well-suited to niche applications |
| 4.4.8. | Brilliant Matters producing speciality organic inks |
| 4.4.9. | Benefits of Brilliant Matters' unique polymerization methodology |
| 4.4.10. | Raynergy Tek targeting high efficiency OPV |
| 4.4.11. | OPV materials opportunities |
| 4.4.12. | Readiness of organic PV materials |
| 4.4.13. | Key takeaways: Organic PV |
| 4.5. | Perovskite Photovoltaics |
| 4.5.1. | What is perovskite PV? |
| 4.5.2. | Perovskite PV - A high achiever |
| 4.5.3. | Perovskite solar cell evolution |
| 4.5.4. | n-i-p vs p-i-n configurations |
| 4.5.5. | Simple structures for scalable perovskite PV |
| 4.5.6. | Emerging research topics in perovskite PV |
| 4.5.7. | Perovskite research begins to plateau |
| 4.5.8. | Perovskite PV incentivisation |
| 4.5.9. | Has perovskite PV lived up to early expectations? |
| 4.5.10. | Perovskite PV could be low-cost alternative to GaAs |
| 4.5.11. | Perovskites can save time, money, and energy relative to silicon PV |
| 4.5.12. | Perovskite PV challenges |
| 4.5.13. | Stability poses a challenge to commercialisation |
| 4.5.14. | Extrinsic degradation |
| 4.5.15. | Intrinsic degradation mechanisms |
| 4.5.16. | Material engineering can improve stability but compromise optical properties |
| 4.5.17. | Commercialisation of perovskite PV underway |
| 4.5.18. | Porter's Five Forces: Thin film perovskite PV market |
| 4.5.19. | SWOT analysis of thin film perovskite PV |
| 4.6. | Perovskite PV Materials Opportunities |
| 4.6.1. | Perovskite Material Components |
| 4.6.2. | Are lead concerns justified? |
| 4.6.3. | Public perception vs reality of lead |
| 4.6.4. | Material composition influences light absorption |
| 4.6.5. | Perovskite active layer materials - a commoditised market |
| 4.6.6. | High demand for low cost transport layers |
| 4.6.7. | Organic charge transport layers have high complexity |
| 4.6.8. | SFX - An alternative to Spiro as a hole transport layer? |
| 4.6.9. | Charge transport layer can limit cell efficiency |
| 4.6.10. | Inorganic charge transport layers are a simpler alternative to organic materials |
| 4.6.11. | Key takeaways: Perovskite PV |
| 4.7. | Applications for Emerging PV |
| 4.7.1. | Introduction: Applications for emerging PV |
| 4.7.2. | Current state of application development |
| 4.7.3. | Meeting application requirements - existing silicon vs thin film perovskite |
| 4.7.4. | Thin film PV for indoor energy harvesting |
| 4.7.5. | Thin film PV targets emerging IoT Applications |
| 4.7.6. | Perovskite PV could be cost-effective alternative for wireless energy harvesting |
| 4.7.7. | Solar powered smart packaging |
| 4.7.8. | Epishine has largest IP portfolio on OPV |
| 4.7.9. | Epishine is leading the way in solar powered IoT |
| 4.7.10. | Epishine considering entering perovskite PV market |
| 4.7.11. | Ribes Tech - OPV developer making customizable OPV modules |
| 4.7.12. | Ribes Tech targeting IoT market |
| 4.7.13. | Dracula Technologies aiming for low-cost small OPV modules |
| 4.7.14. | Dracula Tech intending >5 million piece production capacity by 2024 (i) |
| 4.7.15. | Dracula Tech intending >5 million piece production capacity by 2024 (ii) |
| 4.7.16. | infinityPV developing organic PV powered portable chargers |
| 4.7.17. | Saule Technologies: Perovskite PV developer for indoor electronics |
| 4.7.18. | Saule Technologies developing perovskite PV powered electronic shelf labels |
| 4.7.19. | Perovskite PV for vertical building integration |
| 4.7.20. | Tuneable bandgaps make thin film PV well suited to niche applications |
| 4.7.21. | Ubiquitous Energy developing organic PV glass |
| 4.7.22. | Could thin film PV be used to power cars? |
| 4.7.23. | Perovskite PV for conventional applications |
| 4.7.24. | Key takeways: Applications |
| 4.8. | Scalable Deposition Methods |
| 4.8.1. | Deposition techniques for scalable processing |
| 4.8.2. | Sputtering for high purity deposition |
| 4.8.3. | AACVD is an emerging solution-based vacuum approach |
| 4.8.4. | Inkjet printing for high spatial resolution |
| 4.8.5. | Blade coating is cheap but inconsistent |
| 4.8.6. | Slot-die coating is promising for industry |
| 4.8.7. | Spray coating - rapid but wasteful |
| 4.8.8. | Poor spatial resolution wastes material |
| 4.8.9. | Comparison of deposition methods |
| 4.8.10. | How to decide on thin film deposition methods? |
| 4.8.11. | Towards roll-to-roll printing |
| 4.8.12. | Novel perovskite deposition technique by Creaphys/MBraun |
| 4.8.13. | Thin film PV industry adoption of deposition methods |
| 4.8.14. | Summary of Deposition Methods |
| 4.9. | Substrates and Encapsulation Materials |
| 4.9.1. | Introduction: Substrates and encapsulation for thin film PV |
| 4.9.2. | Substrate choices: Conventional and emerging |
| 4.9.3. | Limitations of rigid glass substrates |
| 4.9.4. | Alternatives to rigid glass |
| 4.9.5. | What is ultra-thin flexible glass? |
| 4.9.6. | Ultra-thin glass improves flexibility |
| 4.9.7. | Encapsulation advantages of ultra-thin flexible glass |
| 4.9.8. | Corning Willow flexible glass: Market leader |
| 4.9.9. | Schott Solar flexible glass for aerospace |
| 4.9.10. | Flexible glass substrates: Advantages and disadvantages |
| 4.9.11. | Plastic substrates - cheap and flexible |
| 4.9.12. | Barrier layer requirement increases cost of plastic substrates |
| 4.9.13. | Why use metal foil substrates? |
| 4.9.14. | Substrate surface roughness impacts cell performance |
| 4.9.15. | Substrate material supply opportunities |
| 4.9.16. | Substrate cost comparison |
| 4.9.17. | Benchmarking substrate materials |
| 4.9.18. | How to choose a substrate |
| 4.9.19. | Glass-glass encapsulation to prevent extrinsic degradation |
| 4.9.20. | Comparison of common polymer encapsulant materials |
| 4.9.21. | Thin film encapsulation |
| 4.9.22. | Al2O3 is an upcoming thin film encapsulant |
| 4.9.23. | Ergis providing flexible barrier films with exceptionally low WVTR |
| 4.9.24. | Commercial flexible encapsulation |
| 4.9.25. | Opportunities within substrates and encapsulation |
| 4.9.26. | Key takeaways: substrates and encapsulation |
| 5. | INORGANIC ALTERNATIVES TO SILICON PV |
| 5.1. | Overview |
| 5.1.1. | Introduction: Inorganic alternatives to silicon |
| 5.1.2. | Inorganic PV comparisons |
| 5.1.3. | Readiness levels of inorganic alternatives to silicon PV |
| 5.1.4. | Summary of inorganic alternatives to silicon PV |
| 5.2. | Cadmium Telluride (CdTe) |
| 5.2.1. | Introduction to CdTe PV: The second most common PV technology |
| 5.2.2. | CdTe Photovoltaics: How does it work? |
| 5.2.3. | New CdTe cell structure increases efficiency |
| 5.2.4. | Why CdTe PV? |
| 5.2.5. | CdTe market share - has it plateaued? |
| 5.2.6. | CdTe PV plagued by toxicity concerns |
| 5.2.7. | CdTe PV suffers from raw material concerns |
| 5.2.8. | Does CdTe face a production limit? |
| 5.2.9. | First Solar's monopoly - room for entry? |
| 5.2.10. | The unexplored rooftop market |
| 5.2.11. | Can Toledo Solar crack emerging markets? |
| 5.2.12. | Alternative absorber materials |
| 5.2.13. | Innovation opportunities for CdTe PV |
| 5.2.14. | SWOT: CdTe PV |
| 5.2.15. | Porter's Five Forces: CdTe PV Market |
| 5.2.16. | Key takeaways: CdTe PV |
| 5.3. | Copper Indium Gallium Selenide (CIGS) |
| 5.3.1. | Introduction to CIGS PV |
| 5.3.2. | CIGS PV: How does it work? |
| 5.3.3. | Value propositions of CIGS PV |
| 5.3.4. | Why has CIGS PV struggled to gain ground? |
| 5.3.5. | Key player exited the market in June 2022 |
| 5.3.6. | Aesthetics are important for BIPV |
| 5.3.7. | Could flexible CIGS solar cells take off? |
| 5.3.8. | Midsummer making flexible cadmium-free CIGS solar cells |
| 5.3.9. | Midsummer targeting rooftop market |
| 5.3.10. | Midsummer attempting expansion into aerospace |
| 5.3.11. | Transition toward cadmium-free cells |
| 5.3.12. | The search for simple low cost deposition |
| 5.3.13. | CIGS PV innovation opportunities |
| 5.3.14. | SWOT: CIGS PV |
| 5.3.15. | Porter's Five Forces: CIGS PV Market |
| 5.3.16. | Key takeaways: CIGS PV |
| 5.4. | Gallium Arsenide |
| 5.4.1. | Introduction to GaAs PV |
| 5.4.2. | GaAs PV: How does it work? |
| 5.4.3. | Multi-junction GaAs solar cells |
| 5.4.4. | Properties of GaAs PV |
| 5.4.5. | The future of GaAs PV? |
| 5.4.6. | Key player Alta Devices has shut down |
| 5.4.7. | Slow manufacturing is an issue for GaAs |
| 5.4.8. | NREL working on inexpensive manufacturing |
| 5.4.9. | Solar cars - an Earth application of GaAs PV? |
| 5.4.10. | GaAs PV innovation opportunities |
| 5.4.11. | SWOT: GaAs PV |
| 5.4.12. | Porter's Five Forces: GaAs PV Market |
| 5.4.13. | Key takeaways: GaAs PV |
| 5.5. | Amorphous Silicon |
| 5.5.1. | Amorphous silicon: What is it? |
| 5.5.2. | Amorphous silicon PV: How does it work? |
| 5.5.3. | Deposition of amorphous silicon |
| 5.5.4. | Onyx Solar producing PV glass with amorphous silicon |
| 5.5.5. | Amorphous silicon PV experiencing market decline |
| 5.5.6. | Conventional silicon PV using amorphous silicon |
| 5.5.7. | Photovoltaic thermal collectors: a potential application of amorphous silicon? |
| 5.5.8. | Does amorphous silicon PV have a future? |
| 5.5.9. | Amorphous silicon PV innovation opportunities |
| 5.5.10. | Porter's Five Forces: a-Si PV Market |
| 5.5.11. | SWOT: Amorphous silicon PV |
| 5.5.12. | Key takeaways: Amorphous silicon PV |
| 5.6. | Copper Zinc Tin Sulfide (CZTS) |
| 5.6.1. | What is CZTS photovoltaics? |
| 5.6.2. | CZTS PV: How does it work? |
| 5.6.3. | Cadmium-free buffer layers |
| 5.6.4. | Crystalsol commercialising CZTS PV |
| 5.6.5. | CZTS as a hole-transport layer in perovskite solar cells |
| 5.6.6. | Solution processing of CZTS |
| 5.6.7. | CZTS PV innovation opportunities |
| 5.6.8. | Porter's Five Forces: CZTS PV Market |
| 5.6.9. | SWOT: CZTS PV |
| 5.6.10. | Key Takeaways: CZTS PV |
| 6. | TANDEM PHOTOVOLTAICS |
| 6.1. | Overview |
| 6.1.1. | Introduction to tandem photovoltaics |
| 6.1.2. | Single junction vs tandem solar cells |
| 6.1.3. | Tandem solar cells to surpass theoretical efficiency limits of a single junction |
| 6.2. | Perovskite on Silicon Tandem |
| 6.2.1. | Perovskite on silicon tandem advantages |
| 6.2.2. | Tandem cell configurations |
| 6.2.3. | Perovskite on silicon tandem cell challenges |
| 6.2.4. | Perovskite on silicon tandem process flow |
| 6.2.5. | Silicon-perovskite tandem cost breakdown |
| 6.2.6. | Oxford PV: Major player in perovskite on silicon tandem PV |
| 6.2.7. | Business model of Oxford PV |
| 6.2.8. | Oxford PV is entering an unestablished market |
| 6.2.9. | CubicPV: Early stage perovskite on silicon developer |
| 6.2.10. | CubicPV's Direct Wafer® Method |
| 6.2.11. | Cubic PV delays timeline for tandem perovskite-on-silicon PV |
| 6.2.12. | Summary of key players (perovskite on silicon tandem) |
| 6.2.13. | Perovskite on silicon tandem PV roadmap |
| 6.2.14. | Porter's Five Forces: perovskite on silicon tandem PV market |
| 6.2.15. | SWOT analysis of perovskite on silicon tandem PV |
| 6.2.16. | Key takeaways: perovskite on silicon tandem |
| 6.3. | All-Perovskite Tandem |
| 6.3.1. | Current status of all-perovskite tandem solar cells |
| 6.3.2. | Bottom cell poses key challenge |
| 6.3.3. | Tin-based perovskites react with HTL |
| 6.3.4. | Emergence of HTL-free perovskite cells |
| 6.3.5. | Carbon-based HTL-free perovskite cells |
| 6.3.6. | Do HTL-free cells have a future? |
| 6.3.7. | Swift Solar: Developing all-perovskite tandem cells |
| 6.3.8. | Swift Solar's all-perovskite approach |
| 6.3.9. | Swift Solar all-perovskite tandem PV for electric cars |
| 6.3.10. | Non-solution deposition techniques could benefit all-perovskite tandem |
| 6.3.11. | Porter's Five Forces: all-perovskite tandem PV market |
| 6.3.12. | SWOT analysis of all-perovskite tandem PV |
| 6.3.13. | Key takeaways: all-perovskite tandem |
| 6.4. | Emerging Tandem Applications |
| 6.4.1. | Solar cell structures for different applications |
| 6.4.2. | Perovskite on silicon tandem PV coming to rooftops soon |
| 6.4.3. | Could tandem PV be integrated into windows? |
| 6.4.4. | Aesthetics may trump efficiency |
| 6.4.5. | Could all-perovskite tandem deliver solar powered vehicles? |
| 6.4.6. | Lightyear: Long range solar electric vehicle |
| 6.4.7. | Key takeaways: tandem PV applications |
| 7. | COMPANY PROFILES |
| 7.1. | Asca |
| 7.2. | Avancis |
| 7.3. | Brilliant Matters |
| 7.4. | Corning |
| 7.5. | Crystalsol |
| 7.6. | CubicPV |
| 7.7. | Dracula Technologies |
| 7.8. | EMC |
| 7.9. | Epishine |
| 7.10. | Exeger |
| 7.11. | GCL |
| 7.12. | Greatcell Solar |
| 7.13. | Heliatek |
| 7.14. | Microquanta Semiconductor |
| 7.15. | Midsummer |
| 7.16. | Onyx Solar |
| 7.17. | Opteria |
| 7.18. | Oxford PV |
| 7.19. | infinityPV |
| 7.20. | Raynergy Tek |
| 7.21. | Ribes Tech |
| 7.22. | Saule Technologies |
| 7.23. | Schott |
| 7.24. | Solaronix |
| 7.25. | Sunew |
| 7.26. | Swift Solar |
| 7.27. | Toledo Solar |