|
Putting on a brave thin-film face
Thin-film technologies a-Si and CIS have so far not proven to be the goldmine EPV once dreamed of. And closures of factories using EPV production lines could mean hopes of reaching profitability are as thin as the cells' layers
themselves.
 |
|
|
 |
©
Heliodomi S.A. |
|
Plus side: EPV is shipping a 5 MW line to Greek start-up Heliodomi. Production is slated to begin next spring. |
|
|
James Groelinger says his credibility is at stake. »I'm banking a lot of me on being profitable in
2004.« The CEO of thin-film production line manufacturer and module producer Energy Photovoltaics Inc. (EPV) no doubt understands that the board, which hired him in Jan. 2001 to push the fortunes of the company's low-cost, low-efficiency technology, could just as easily decide to fire him if the financials don't start improving. A $4 million turnover in 2002 was accompanied by a $6 million loss. This year, Groelinger expects between $12 and 15 million in revenue, but again with a negative bottom line.
EPV's cheap batch-process a-Si production technology and its Integrated Manufacturing System
– complete with equipment, training, support, and warranty sold to wannabe PV entrepreneurs
– were supposed to be winners in the thin-film wave. In the 1980s alone, EPV made deals with half a dozen companies from China and Croatia to France and the UK. But even though Groelinger says a-Si modules made with EPV equipment
– currently produced in sizes up to 40 W – can be sold at a rather low $2.25 to $2.75 per watt, the fates have not been kind to the New Jersey-based company.
The latest blow came on June 13, when Hungarian-based Dunasolar Photovoltaics Inc., in which EPV has a 10 percent stake, shut down module production due to lack of government support and the cost of transporting the glass-glass modules. The 5 MW capacity EPV line has now been sold to Bangkok Cable in Thailand (see articles, p. 34).
This was not the kind of future envisioned back in Dec. 2000 by a triumvirate of international EPV investors
– MVV Energie of Germany; CHI Energy Inc., a subsidiary of Italian energy supplier ENEL; and US-based Integrated Electrical Services Inc. Impressed by both the a-Si technology and promising research on CIS production being done at EPV, they put up $14 million, getting seats on the board in the bargain.
In addition, MVV acquired the right to start up CIS production in Germany, but it never happened (see PI 10/2002, p. 11). Even now, plans for CIS production at EPV's process development site have stalled
– it's anywhere from six months to two years away from being ready, says Groelinger.
California factory shuts down
An earlier setback came when an a-Si production subsidiary called CalSolar, started by EPV in 1999 to supply a solar program run by the Sacramento Municipal Utility Department (SMUD) in California's capital city, self-destructed. By the time the 38 employees were laid off in June 2002 (see PI 7/2002, p. 14), CalSolar was being operated by New York-based TerraSolar, a PV company owned by EPV's board chairman and CTO Zoltan Kiss, the Hungarian-born inventor who had founded EPV in 1991 after another of his thin-film start-ups
– Chronar Corp. – went under. When resuscitation attempts at CalSolar failed, it was shut down at the end of 2002. The result? The board dumped Kiss.
All of which leaves Groelinger trying to concentrate on future hopes rather than dwelling on past failures. He points to a 5 MW production line that was to be delivered to Tianjin Machinery Import and Export Co. in China by the end of July, with production starting before the end of the year. While there is no EPV ownership participation, EPV does have a 20 percent stake in a Greek a-Si start-up, Heliodomi S.A. (see PI 8/2001, p. 8). Groelinger expects a 5 MW production line, valued at $11 million, to be shipped by September, with production slated to begin in the spring of 2004. In addition, he says, EPV is working on at least three other
»exciting opportunities in Western Europe« in which EPV could have »an on-going stake and an operating role."«
He declined to give details, saying only that decisions should be reached by early September. As for CalSolar, EPV is negotiating with a financing company that has a lien on the production line. Groelinger says by the end of the summer, it will be clear if it can be
»reenergized as a manufacturing facility,"« perhaps under a different name, but with some kind of EPV involvement. Back at home, EPV is planning to ramp up production on its 1.5 kW capacity line (rated at 2.5 MW on EPV's
website) – used historically for demonstration purposes – from the 190 kW produced last year to 500 kW by autumn. Depending on market demand, says Groelinger, it could move up to full-scale production by the beginning of next year.
But with such limited production (20 MW would be a generous estimate even if all EPV production lines were running at full capacity) and a module efficiency which, according to Groelinger, is between 5.5 and 6 percent, it's hard to see how EPV will ever reach escape velocity
– especially since he considers cleanrooms an unnecessary expense. But without the ability to increase efficiencies, says Ken Zweibel, manager of the Thin-Film Partnership program at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), EPV is
»at a cul-de-sac with amorphous silicon."« And this, he contends, amplifies the balance-of-systems costs on a per-watt basis.
Still, EPV's low-cost a-Si technology has found a niche in off-grid solar home systems. Free Energy Solar, which operates a 1.2 MW capacity factory based on EPV equipment in Lens, France, has successfully established its low-power modules in third-world countries. And the latest order comes from a country that has a huge PV rural electrification projects: China. But it may take more than this kind of limited role if Groelinger wants to see EPV cross the threshold of profitability in 2004
– and safeguard his job.
|
|
