Promises of Cu (In, Ga)Se2 Thin Film Solar Cells from the Perspective of Material Properties, Fabrication Methods and Current Research Challenges
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) technologies are undoubtedly going to merge with mainstream energy harvesting technologies for mankind around the globe in near future. The promises that various photovoltaic options provide to date include high conversion efficiency with low manufacturing cost. Solar manufacturing industries are in the midst of an argument over which material to dominate the future for harvesting sunlight. Solar panels based on silicon currently account for more than 90% of the production with some limitations. However, much attention has been paid to alternatives like thin film semiconductor materials such as amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride and copper-indium-gallium-diselenide based solar cells due to the promises in cost efficiency. Attributed to some recent breakthrough in copper-indium-gallium-diselenide (CIS, thereafter) based solar cell efficiency, commercialization has got momentum around the world. Here, progresses in Cu (In, Ga) Se2 thin film solar cells technologies are discussed here in regard to material properties of the Cu (In, Ga) Se2 absorber layer, fabrication method of the complete device and the current CIGS research challenges. The scope of this review aims to elucidate the basics of CIGS solar cells fabricated by co-evaporation method which yields the highest conversion efficiency so far.
Received: September 20, 2010;
Accepted: November 02, 2010;
Published: January 22, 2011
Among all other thin film solar cells, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells
have emerged as one of the most promising solar cells in terms cost-effective
photovoltaic technologies. The main advantage of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin
film solar cells over the popular bulk monocrystalline silicon solar cells is
the lesser material and thermal energy usage during the fabrication process.
Lesser material and thermal energy usage directly results in overall lower production
cost. The most important aspect of all, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells
have demonstrated high efficiencies in both cell and the module levels. Currently
at the time of writing this article, the highest cell efficiency is 20.1% with
0.5 cm2 total area fabricated by ZSW (Centre for Solar Energy and
Hydrogen Research, Germany, 2010). As for module efficiency, National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) of United States of America has attained highest efficiency
of 13.8%. Cu(In,Ga)Se flexible thin film solar cells have also shown promising
conversion efficiency of 17.6%. Moreover, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film
modules show good outdoor stability (Ullal et al.,
1997) and higher radiation resistance, compared to crystalline silicon solar
cells (Jasenek et al., 2001). The latter cell
property makes Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells a promising candidate as
power generator for space application. Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells can
be regarded as a complex structure from electronics point of view. As can be
observed in Fig. 1, there are 6 main layers excluding the
front electrode (not shown). This physically means there are 5 heterointerfaces
in the overall structure. When two dissimilar semiconductors make a metallurgical
junction, a heterojunction is said to be formed. The inter-diffusion of chemical
elements from these two semiconductor layers forms a new thin layer in between
these two layers. This new layer is known as the heterointerface layer. Interestingly,
in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells the properties of heterojunction and
heterointerfaces play a major role in the performance of solar cells.
This review aims to elucidate a few key points pertaining the Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cells. The primary key points emphasized here are: (1) material properties
of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer, (2) fabrication method of complete
Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells with greater emphasize given on various
deposition method of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer and (3) current
research challenges in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells.
|| Schematic structure of conventional Cu(In,Ga)Se2
As for historical background, the research group in Bell Laboratories grew
a number of ternary chalcopyrite compounds and characterized their electrical
and optical properties in the early 1970s (Tell et al.,
1971, 1972). CuInSe2 ternary compound
synthesis and characterization started even earlier around 1953 by Hahn
et al. (1953). Apart from the ternary chalcopyrite compounds, quaternary
compounds were also intensively explored especially the CuGaxIn1-xS2
alloys (Shay et al., 1974). The aforesaid works
on ternary and quaternary compounds were mainly done on band structure characterization.
The potential of CuInSe2 as photovoltaic material was first demonstrated
by Wagner et al. (1974) when the first CuInSe2
solar cells were made by evaporating n-type CDs onto p-type single crystals
of CuInSe2 (Wagner et al., 1974).
Since then, CuInSe2 compound has steadily stamped its mark as one
of the interesting and promising photovoltaic material for terrestrial and space
application as well.
Structural properties of Cu(In,Ga)Se2: The quaternary compound of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 is formed when Gallium atoms partially substitute Indium atoms in CuInSe2 ternary system. Hence, the material properties of CuInSe2 will be reviewed in this section as the basic to understand the properties of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 compound. The ternary chalcopyrite CuInSe2 crystallizes in tetragonal type space group 142 days as shown in Fig. 2.
The structure for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 is similar to the structure shown
in Fig. 2. The tetragonal structure of the chalcopyrite compound
can be regarded as a superlattice zincblende structure by doubling its unit
cube along the z-axis that becomes the c-axis of the chalcopyrite structure
(Belhadj et al., 2004).
|| Unit cell of CuInSe2 lattice structure
||Structural parameters a and c, c/a ratios for CuInSe2
and CuGaSe2 compounds
The lattice parameter of the tetragonal unit cell of a chalcopyrite structure
is given in Table 1.
The ratio of c/a is called tetragonal deformation and the variations in the
ratio values originate from the fact that the strength of the Cu-Se and the
In-Se or Ga-Se bonds are different (Shafarman and Stolt,
2003). Smaller c/a ratio indicates the tetragonal unit cell is more closely
Phase diagram of Cu-In-Se system: The desired phase in Cu-In-Se system
for a high efficiency Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells is the α-CuInSe2
phase. Since there is numerous possible phases that can exist in the Cu-In-Se
ternary system, the understanding of the phase diagram of the Cu-In-Se system
is very crucial. Figure 3 shows the pseudo-binary In2Se3-Cu2Se
equilibrium phase diagram (Chang et al., 1996).
From the pseudo-binary phase diagram, it can clearly be seen that the single
phase α-CuInSe2 only extends to a narrow region. However, the
entire Cu2Se + CuInSe2 gives a direct chemical reaction
path to a stoichiometric single phase CuInSe2 (Kushia
et al., 1994). The binary compound of Cu2Se is in liquid
phase at growth temperature than 523°C (Chakrabarti
and Laughlin, 1981). Hence, an oversupply of the group III elements (In
or Ga) at temperature of 532°C or higher gives a reaction path to form a
CIGS phase, which is assisted by the liquid phase of Cu2Se. Although,
single phase chalcopyrite compound is highly desired as the main absorber layer
material in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells, other phases inevitably are
formed during the fabrication process. The slightly off-stoichiometric phases
exist along the pseudo-binary Cu2Se-In2Se3
tie line called the ordered defect compounds (ODC) which are generally Cu-poor
compounds (Fearheiley, 1986). The occurrence of a number
of Cu-poor phases e.g., CuIn3Se5 and CuIn5Se8
on the surface of the absorber layer plays an important role in the interface
formation between the n-type CDs and p-type CIGS layer (Schmid
et al., 1993). More about phase diagram of Cu-In-Se ternary compounds
can be found in other literature (Godecke et al.,
Defect physics of Cu(In,Ga)Se2: The most special feature
of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 quaternary compound is its ability to tolerate a
large number of off-stoichiometric compounds without degrading its electronic
properties severely. To explain the aforesaid phenomena, the defect physics
of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 must be reviewed thoroughly. It is well known that
CuInSe2 compound does not need any external doping process to induce
a specific type of conduction. CuInSe2 is doped by its native defects,
which means that the intrinsic defects that exist after the deposition process
determine the conductivity type of the film. P-type CuInSe2 can be
grown if the material is overall Cu-poor and is annealed under high Se vapour
pressure whereas an overall Cu-rich film with Se deficiency results in n-type
film (Migliorato et al., 1975; Noufi
et al., 1984). From the above facts, vacancy of Se, VSe
(Se deficiency) is responsible as dominant donor in n-type material and the
vacancy of Cu, VCu (deficiency of Cu) is held responsible as the
dominant acceptor in p-type film. The very efficient p-type self doping ability
of CuInSe2 is explained by the easy formation of the shallow Cu vacancies
(Zhang et al., 1998). The formation of VCu
intrinsic defect will induce an extra energy level close to the valence
band (~30 meV above valence band) resembling the acceptor level in extrinsic
semiconductor whereas the formation of VSe intrinsic defect will
induce an extra energy level close to the conduction band resembling the donor
level in extrinsic semiconductor. Apart from the Vse which acts as
donor level, there are a few other defects that can induce donor energy level
such as InCu (In at a Cu site). Hence, in order to fabricate a p-type
Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film, the intrinsic defect such as VSe and
InCu must be reduced.
The ability of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 quaternary compound to tolerate a large
number of off-stoichiometric phases is due to the defect complex pairs of 2VCu
+ InCu ( 2 Cu vacancies with an In on Cu antisite defect) (Zhang
et al., 1998, 1997). High efficiency Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cells are generally fabricated with slightly Cu-poor absorber film with
the copper to indium ratio in between 0.9 to 0.98 (0.90<Cu/In<0.98) (Conteras
and Noufi, 1997). Theoretical calculations using the first-principles electronic
structure theory by Zhang et al. (1998) have
shown that the defect complex pair of 2VCu and InCu has
zero or negative formation enthalpy. This means that the defect pair of 2VCu
and InCu exists spontaneously under equilibrium condition in abundance.
The formation of this defect pair in the Cu-poor Cu(In,Ga)Se2 films
is the main reason that the film can afford large number of Ordered Defect Compounds
(ODC) or also known as the Copper Poor Compounds (CPCs) such as Cu(In,Ga)3Se5
and Cu(In, Ga)5Se8. In addition, the defect complex pairs
that are formed are electrically inactive due to the passivation of the InCu2+
deep level by 2VCu-.
||Electronic levels of intrinsic defects in CuInSe2.
(Black histogram columns indicate acceptor type levels and white histogram
columns indicate donor type level)
Without considering the incorporation of Ga or S into CuInSe2 ternary
system there are already 12 possible intrinsic defects that can take place in
the film. The origin of defect states in chalcopyrite compounds can be found
from literatures (Jaffe and Zunger, 1983a, b;
Martins and Zunger, 1984). It is already becoming clear
that the defect chemistry that is being involved is far more complicated than
any other photovoltaic material. Figure 4 below shows a summary
of theoretical and experimental value of electronic levels of intrinsic defects
in respect to the Conduction Band Minimum (CBM) and Valence Band Maximum (VBM)
of CuInSe2 (Zhang et al., 1997, 1998).
Optical property and band gap grading: Cu(In,Ga)Se2 has a
direct band gap which is a very desirable in photovoltaic material. More optimistically,
the absorption coefficient of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 is high around 105
cm-1 for a band gap of 1.4 eV (Neumann, 1986).
The fact that the requirement for active material is less in Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cell is due to the high absorption coefficient. A material with high absorption
coefficient physically means that photons only have to travel a very short distance
before being absorbed by the material.
Polycrystalline Cu(In,Ga)Se2 semiconductor has a tunable band gap
that varies with the gallium content (Ga substitutes In in the chalcopyrite
structure). The band gap for CuInSe2 is around 1 eV (0.98-1.04 eV)
(Ramanathan et al., 2003), whereas by adding
Ga into the ternary system of CuInSe2, the band gap energy of the
CIGS quaternary system can be varied over the range of 1.04 to 1.68 eV (Huang,
||Different types of absorber band gap profiles. (a) Uniform
band gap. (b) Space charge region grading (front grading). (c) Back surface
grading. (d) Double grading
Currently, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells with Ga/(In+Ga) ratio of 0.3
which corresponds to a band gap energy range of 1.1-1.2 eV yields the best efficiency
both in laboratory and commercial modules. Spatial variation of Ga composition
in the CIGS thin film determines the band gap profile of the CIGS absorber layer.
Hence, by varying the Ga composition spatially within the CIGS absorber layer,
various band gap profiles can be achieved as shown in Fig. 5.
Introduction of higher Ga/(In+Ga) ratio near the space charge region or near
the back surface of the CIGS absorber layer will create a slight elevation in
the band gap around the specified region. The increase in the band gap, ΔEg
will give rise to an additional electric field (Lundberg
et al., 2005) which is also known as quasi-electrical field (Kroemer,
2001). Ga incorporation at the Space Charge Region (SCR) and at the back
surface will improve Jsc performance parameter due to the additional
electric force created that increases the carrier collection probability. Electron
drift-diffusion length, Le is increased by the existence of the additional
electric force which in turn results in a larger generated carrier collection
at the junction with the corresponding increase of the illumination current
density (Acevedo, 2009). The back surface grading also
contributes in reducing the carrier recombination at the back contact, as CIGS/Mo
interface is expected to have high recombination velocity (Lundberg
et al., 2005). The increase in quasi-electric field at the back contact
is expected to compensate the recombination at the back contact (Acevedo,
2009; Dullweber et al., 2001). Generally,
band gap grading is advantageous in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cell operation.
Deposition method of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer: There are
wide ranges of deposition methods that can be employed to grow Cu(In,Ga)Se2
film. Among all, only two specific deposition methods are able to produce
high efficiency Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells which are co-evaporation
of constituents elements method and selenization of metal precursor. All the
previous champion cells and the current world record Cu(In,Ga)Se2 cell
are fabricated by the co-evaporation method (Ramanathan
et al., 2003; Contreras et al., 1999).
Hence, in this review only the co-evaporation method will be discussed. Literature
materials on selenization of metal precursors method can be reviewed in (Dejene,
2009; Nishiwaki et al., 2001) and rapid thermal
processing of stacked elemental layers by Probst et al.
(1996). Conventionally, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer is deposited
on top Molybdenum (acts as back contact) coated soda lime glass. Simultaneous
co-evaporation of constituent elements Cu, In, Ga, Se is done in a vacuum chamber
as shown in the Fig. 6.
The elements of Cu, In, Ga and Se are loaded into the effusion cells and heated
up to over 1300°C for Cu, 1100°C for In, 1200°C for Ga and 350°C
for Se to produce respective molecular beams of the elements which are directed
towards the heated rotating substrate. The greatest advantage of this method
is the composition of the elements can be controlled by varying the effusion
cell temperature which determines the element fluxes at any time during the
deposition process. The conventional thickness of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber
layer is around 2 μm to 2.5 μm (Puvaneswaran et
||Vacuum chamber used in co-evaporation process of Cu(In,Ga)Se2
Hence the time required to deposit a certain thickness of absorber layer depends
on the deposition rate which has a linear relation with the effusion rate of
One of the important parameters in thermal co-evaporation is the deposition
profile which is the recipe to fabricate high quality absorber layer.
The deposition profile basically contains the information of variation of elemental
fluxes (related to temperature) over time throughout the deposition process.
In this study, three important deposition profiles which are constant rate deposition,
Boeing process and three stage process will be discussed with the characteristics
of consequent deposited Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber films. The co-evaporation
process with the constant rate deposition profile is shown (line 1) in Fig.
7 (Shafarman and Zhu, 2000). The effects of Cu-rich
composition at the beginning (line 2) and in the middle (line 3) of deposition
process are also investigated. The deposition profiles for (2) and (3) are famously
known as the Boeing process in which the film growth has a portion
of Cu-rich profile at the beginning and later the fluxes are adjusted (In and
Ga fluxes are deposited while Cu flux is terminated) to finish the overall composition
of the film is Cu-poor (Mickelsen and Chen, 1980). In
fact, the photovoltaic community began to give a substantial attention to CuInSe2
solar cells when Mickelsen et al fabricated high efficiency 9.4%
cells using the Boeing process. Apart from co-evaporation and selenization methods,
there are few other methods to fabricate Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer
namely closed space sublimation, reactive sputtering and chemical bath deposition.
The overall Cu/III composition is maintained slightly below unity. Table
2 shows the performance of the solar cells with different Cu fluxes profiles
and different substrate temperature, such as Tss of 400 and 550°C. From
microstructural point of view, the grain size of film which is deposited with
Cu-rich profile at any instant of deposition is larger than grain size in film
deposited with uniform Cu flux.
||Various deposition profiles used in CIGS film growth
|| CuInSe2 solar cell performance at various deposition
It is suggested that during Cu-rich composition, the binary phase of CuxSe
is formed in the film and enhances the grain size (Yamaguchi,
1995; Klenk et al., 1993).
Three-stage process is a sequential deposition process (Gabor
et al., 1994) and the deposition profile of a three-stage process
is shown in the Fig. 8.
In the first stage, In, Ga and Se are evaporated to form (In, Ga)xSey compound, followed by the deposition of Cu and Se in the second stage. The Cu flux is supplied until the film is overall Cu-rich composition wise. This is indicated by the slight dip in the substrate temperature indicator towards the end of second stage. This slight dip in the temperature profile is the indication of excess CuxSe binary phase formation on the film surface. CuxSe has lesser thermal emissivity which causes the substrate temperature to drop. The main objective making the film Cu-rich is to enhance the grain size of the film. The substrate temperature is also ramped up to promote inter-diffusion of elements. The final stage of this process intends to make the films final composition slightly Cu-poor by supplying In, Ga and Se fluxes.
Former champion Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cell which recorded 19.9% efficiency
was fabricated by using the three stage process but with slight modification
by NREL researchers (Repins et al., 2008). The
modification was the termination of the 3 stage process without Ga for the last
100 Angstrom. Throughout the three stage process, the Se flux is always oversupplied.
An investigation carried out by Islam et al. (2009)
found out that deficiency of Se supply decreases the hole concentration and
increases the resistivity of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film. Carrier concentration
in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film fabricated by three stage process is around
1016/cm3 to 1017/cm3 (Mesa
et al., 2010). It can be considered that Se deficiency should generate
anion vacancy, Vse, which would act as donor (Stanbery,
2002). The dependence of Se beam on defect states in CIGS based solar cells
is described elsewhere (Sakurai et al., 2010).
Apart from co-evaporation and selenization methods, there are few other methods
to fabricate Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer namely close space sublimation
(Guenoun et al., 1998), reactive sputtering (Thornton
et al., 1988) and chemical bath deposition (Murali,
PN Heterojunction formation: cadmium sulphide (CDs) layer: A thin 50
nm of n-type CDs is deposited on top Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer
to form a pn heterojunction. Conventionally, CDs is deposited by Chemical Bath
Deposition (CBD). Initially, CDs layer was 1-2 μm thick but it has been
observed that blue photon loss occurs due to the absorption in the CDs layer.
To overcome this problem, thick CDs layer is replaced by a thin layer of CDs
and highly conductive ZnO layer (Potter, 1986). Thinner
CDs minimizes photon loss in the layer . The chemical constituents needed
to perform CBD of CDs are cadmium salt (cadmium source e.g. CdSO4,
CdI2), complexing agent (commonly ammonia, NH3) and a
sulphur precursor (sulphur source commonly thiourea, SC(NH2)2).
These chemicals with a specific concentration are mixed to form an alkaline
aqueous solution. The Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film is immersed in a bath containing
the solution at a temperature of 70°C. The reaction of the solution results
in the growth of CDs on the Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film. An elaborated CBD
process of CDs on Cu(In,Ga)Se2 film can be found in other literature
(Hashimoto et al., 1998).
Although CDs/Cu(In,Ga)Se2 devices have achieved high conversion
efficiency (Ramanathan et al., 2003; Contreras
et al., 1999), a cadmium free buffer layer is preferred as the heterojunction
partner of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 due to environmental concerns. One of the
promising alternative candidates to CDs is zinc sulphide (ZnS). ZnS/Cu(In,Ga)Se2
devices have already demonstrated high efficiency of 18.8% (Nakada
and Mizutani, 2002). Another replacement for CDs buffer layer is the Zn1-x
MgxO. The best Zn1-xMgxO/ Cu(In,Ga)Se2
cell efficiency is 16.2% (active area) achieved by Matsushita Electric Industrial
(Negami et al., 2002). An excellent treatment
of buffer layers for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells application is given
by Siebentritt (2004) and numerical modeling of Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cells with various buffer layers can be found by Puvaneswaran
et al. (2010).
SOLAR CELL FABRICATION
Once the pn heterojunction is formed between CDs and Cu(In,Ga)Se2
absorber layer, an undoped high resistivity ZnO (also known as i-ZnO) buffer
layer is deposited by radio frequency (rf) magnetron sputtering before the sputter-deposition
of Transparent Conducting Oxide (TCO) layer. Since the CDs layer is thin, formation
of pinholes in the layer is quite imminent. Existence of pinholes in CDs will
cause shunting of current if the TCO and Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber layer
comes to contact. To avoid this, a 50 nm thick undoped ZnO is sandwiched between
CDs and TCO layer. Hence, the requirement of ZnO buffer layer depends on the
quality and thickness of CDs layer (Rau and Schmidt, 2001).
The common TCO material for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cell is Al doped ZnO.
A 50 to 200 nm thick ZnO:Al is deposited by dc magnetron sputtering. The conductivity
of the TCO depends on the amount of Al doped in ZnO and usually the conductivity
is around 103 Ω-1 cm-1. After the TCO
deposition, a post deposition air annealing process at 200°C for one or
two minutes is practiced to increase the efficiency of the cell (Tuttle
et al., 1996). Finally, a Ni or Al metal grid contact is deposited
by thermal evaporation onto the TCO layer. An optimum metal grid area is needed
to facilitate the maximum transmission of incident sunlight on to the cell.
CURRENT CHALLENGES IN CU(IN,GA)SE2 SOLAR CELL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The fact that Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells are being established as
one of the most promising photovoltaic materials applies only for solar cells
with low band gap in the range of 1.1 to 1.2 eV. The effort to replicate the
high efficiency cells with higher band gap is so far futile. The increase in
the performance of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film solar cells partially lies
on the development of the solar cells with higher band gaps as the optimum band
gap value for terrestrial single junction solar cells is 1.5 eV (Martin,
1982). In particular, Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cell with high Ga content
(Ga/(Ga+In) ~ 0.6, corresponds to band gap of 1.5 eV) yields much lower efficiency
than anticipated. Higher band gap material is expected to produce lower current
densities but higher operating voltage which ultimately leads to lower resistive
losses (I2R losses) which is desirable in solar modules (Siebentritt,
So far, the open circuit voltage, Voc of the wide band gap Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cells is not proportional with the increase in band gap as one would expect.
The failure in increasing the open circuit voltage is related to the leakage
of Cu from the Cu(In,Ga)Se2 grains which eventually creates defects
that are known as N1 and N2 among the Cu(In,Ga)Se2
researches (Van Vechten, 2005; Cahen
and Noufi, 1989; Niki et al., 2001). Comprehensive
details on leakage phenomena of Cu from the grains and defect formation in chalcopyrite
compound is given in (Van Vechten, 2005). Moreover, study
shows that increase in Ga/(Ga+In) ratio more than 0.3 in Cu(In,Ga)Se2
increases the bulk defect densities in the absorber layer by one magnitude which
can degrade the performance of the solar cells (Hanna et
al., 2001). Defects in either bulk, interface or depletion region affects
the electronic transport in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells due to recombination
mechanism (Rau and Schock, 1999). The idea of incorporation
of atomic diffusion barrier in Cu- chalcopyrite by Van Vechten
(2005) must be implemented practically to observe the viability of the solution.
Since the Cu(In,Ga)(S,Se)2 alloy system provides band gap over the
range of 1 eV to 2.5 eV, high-efficiency Cu-chalcopyrite based tandem solar
cells can be realized if the open circuit voltage for wide gap chalcopyrite
can be increased beforehand. Hence, increasing the open circuit voltage of wide
gap chalcopyrite is the most central issue in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar
This review article has highlighted the basics of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar
cells in terms of its material properties, fabrication methods and also the
primary challenges that if resolved may propel Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar
cells into greater heights in photovoltaic applications in near future. The
complex defect physics of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 quaternary compound is one
of the reasons that the overall understanding of the device physics has been
vague initially. However, through vigorous research and theoretical prediction,
the defect formation physics and its relevance to the Cu(In,Ga)Se2
solar cells operation have been becoming clear over the period of time. The
capability of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells as one of the low cost, high
efficiency photovoltaic material is proven up to certain extent primarily in
laboratory scale. Yet, there is a huge potential in terms of Cu(In,Ga)Se2
thin film solar module efficiency compared to the laboratory cells which
exhibits high conversion efficiency. Hence, the mechanism that is responsible
for the inconsistency in terms of efficiency of solar cells and modules must
be addressed with higher priority.
The author would like to acknowledge the Solar Energy Research Institute (SERI) of The National University of Malaysia (UKM) for giving total support to all ongoing thin film photovoltaic study. Special gratitude is also extended to Mr. Puvaneswaran Chelvanathan for his invaluable contribution with his ongoing study on CIS based solar cells at the National University of Malaysia.
1: Ullal, H.S., K. Zweibel and B.V. Roedern, 1997. Current status of polycrystalline thin film PV technologies. Proceedings of 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialist Conference, Sept. 28- Oct. 03, Anaheim, California, pp: 301-301.
2: Jasenek, A., U. Rau, K. Weinert, I.M. Kotschau and G. Hanna et al., 2001. Radiation resistance of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells under 1- MeV electron irradiation. Thin Solid Films, 387: 228-230.
3: Tell, B., J.L. Shay and H.M. Kasper, 1971. Electrical properties, optical properties and band structure of CuGaS2 and CuInS2. Phys. Rev. B., 4: 2463-2471.
4: Tell, B., J.L. Shay, H.M. Kasper and L.M. Schiavone, 1972. p-d hybridization of the valence band of I-III-VI2 compounds. Phys. Rev. B., 5: 5003-5005.
5: Hahn, H., G. Frank, W. Klinger, A.D. Meyer and G. Storger, 1953. Untersuchungen uber ternare Chalkogenide. V. Uber einige ternare Chalkogenide mit Chalkopyritstruktur Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem., 271: 153-170.
6: Shay, J.L., B. Tell, H.M. Kasper and R.L. Barns, 1974. Valence band structure of CuGaxIn1-xSe2 alloys. Phys. Rev. B., 10: 1748-1750.
7: Wagner, S., J. Shay, P. Migliorato and H. Kasper, 1974. CuInSe2∕CdS heterojunction photovoltaic detectors. Applied Phys. Lett., 25: 434-435.
8: Belhadj, M., T. Tadjer, B. Abbar, Z. Bousahla, B. Bouhafs and H. Aourag, 2004. Structural, electronic and optical calculations of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 ternary chalcopyrites. Phys. Stat. Sol., 241: 2516-2528.
9: Spiess, H.W., V. Haeberln, G. Brandt, A. Rauber and J. Schneider, 1974. Nuclear magnetic resonance in IB-III-VI2 semiconductors. Phys. Stat. Sol., 62: 183-192.
10: Abrahams, S.C. and J.L. Bernstein, 1974. Piezoelectric nonlinear optic CuGaSe2 and CdGeAs2: Crystal structure, chalcopyrite microhardness and sublattice distortion. J. Chem. Phys., 61: 1140-1140.
11: Shafarman, W.N. and L. Stolt, 2003. Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Solar Cells. In: Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering, Luque, A. and S. Hegedus, (Eds.). John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Somerset, NJ, ISBN: 978-0-471-49196-5, pp: 567-616.
12: Chang, C.H., A. Davydov, B.J. Stanbery and T.J. Anderson, 1996. Thermodynamic assessment of the Cu-In-Se system and application to the thin film photovoltaics. Proceedings of the Conference Record of the 25th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, May 13-17, Washington DC, pp: 849-849.
13: Kushia, K., A. Shimizu, K. Saito, A. Yamada and M. Konagai, 1994. Development of high efficienc. Proceedings of 1st World Conference Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, Dec. 5-9, Waikoloa, Hawaii, pp: 87-87.
14: Chakrabarti, D.J. and D.E. Laughlin, 1981. The Cu-Se (Copper-Selenium) system. J. Phase Equil., 2: 305-315.
15: Schmid, D., M. Ruckh, F. Grunwald and H.W. Schock, 1993. Chalcopyrite/defect chalcopyrite heterojunctions on the basis of CuInSe2. J. Applied Phys., 73: 2902-2909.
16: Godecke, T., T. Haalboom and F. Ernst, 2000. Phase Equilibria of Cu-In-Se, I. Stable state and non-equilibrium states of the In2Se3-Cu2Se subsystem. Z. Metallkd., 91: 622-634.
Direct Link |
17: Migliorato, P., J.L. Shay, H.M. Kasper and S. Wagner, 1975. Room temperature electrical properties of ten I-III-VI2 semiconductors. J. Applied Phys., 43: 2469-2471.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
18: Noufi, R., R. Axton, C. Herrington and S.K. Deb, 1984. Electronic properties versus composition of thin films of CuInSe2. Appl. Phys. Lett., 45: 668-668.
19: Zhang, S., S. Wei, A. Zunger and H. Katayama-Yoshida, 1998. Defect physics of the CuInSe2 chalcopyrite semiconductor. Phys. Rev. B., 57: 9642-9656.
20: Zhang, S., S. Wei and A. Zunger, 1997. Stabilization of ternary compounds via ordered arrays of defect pairs. Phys. Rev. Lett., 78: 4059-4062.
21: Kroemer, H., 2001. Quasielectric fields and band offsets: Teaching electrons new tricks. Rev. Mod. Phys., 73: 783-793.
22: Conteras, M.A. and R. Noufi, 1997. Chalcopyrite Cu(In,Ga)Se2 and defect-chalcopyrite Cu(In,Ga)3Se5 materials in photovoltaic P-N junctions. J. Cryst. Growth., 17: 283-288.
23: Jaffe, J.E. and A. Zunger, 1983. Electronic structure of the ternary chalcopyrite semiconductors CuAlS2, CuGaS2, CuInS2, CuAlSe2, CuGaSe2 and CuInSe2. Phys. Rev. B., 28: 5822-5822.
24: Jaffe, J.E. and A. Zunger, 1983. Anion displacements and the band-gap anomaly in ternary ABC2 chalcopyrite semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B., 27: 5176-5176.
25: Fearheiley, M., 1986. The phase relations in the Cu, In, Se system and the growth of CuInSe2 single crystals. Solar Cells, 16: 91-100.
26: Martins, J.L. and A. Zunger, 1984. Structural and chemical changes in binary versus ternary tetrahedral semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B., 32: 2689-2689.
27: Neumann, H., 1986. Optical properties and electronic band structure of CuInSe. Sol. Cells, 16: 317-333.
28: Ramanathan, K., M.A. Contreras, C.L. Perkins, S. Asher and F.S. Hasoon et al., 2003. Properties of 19.2% efficiency ZnO/CdS/CuInGaSe2 Thin-film solar cells. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl., 11: 225-230.
29: Huang, C.H., 2008. Effects of Ga content on Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells studied by numerical modeling. J. Phys. Chem. Sol., 69: 330-334.
30: Lundberg, O., M. Edoff and L. Stolt, 2005. The effect of Ga-grading in CIGS thin film solar cells. Thin Solid Films, 480-481: 520-525.
31: Acevedo, A.M., 2009. Variable band-gap semiconductor as the basis of new solar cells. Sol. Energy, 83: 1466-1471.
32: Dullweber, T., O. Lundbergb, J. Malmstromb, H.W. Schock and J.H. Werner et al., 2001. Back surface band gap gradings in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells. Thin Solid Films, 387: 11-13.
33: Contreras, M.A., B. Egaas, K. Ramanathan, J. Hiltner, A. Swartzlander, F. Hasoon and R. Noufi, 1999. Progress toward 20% efficiency in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 polycrystalline thin-film solar cells. Prog. Potovoltaics, 7: 311-316.
Direct Link |
34: Dejene, F.B., 2009. The structural and material properties of CuInSe2 and Cu(In,Ga)Se2 prepared by selenization of stacks of metal and compound precursors by Se vapor for solar cell applications. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 93: 577-592.
35: Nishiwaki, S., T. Satoh, Y. Hashimoto, T. Negami and T. Wada, 2001. Preparation of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin films at low substrate temperatures. J. Mater. Res., 16: 394-399.
36: Probst, V., F. Karg, J. Rimmasch, W. Riedl, W. Stetter, H. Harms and O. Eibl, 1996. Advanced stacked elemental layer process for Cu(InGa)Se2 thin film photovoltaic devices. Mater. Res. Soc. Proc., 426: 165-165.
Direct Link |
37: Puvaneswaran, C., M.I. Hossain and N. Amin, 2010. Performance analysis of copper-indium-gallium-diselenide (CIGS) solar cells with various buffer layers by SCAPS. Curr. Applied Phys., 10: 387-391.
38: Shafarman, W. and J. Zhu, 2000. Effect of substrate temperature and depostion profile on evaporated Cu(InGa)Se2 films and devices. Thin Solid Films, 361-362: 473-477.
39: Mickelsen, R.A. and W.S. Chen, 1980. High photocurrent polycrystalline thin‐film CdS/CuInSe2 solar cell. Appl. Phys. Lett., 39: 371-371.
40: Yamaguchi, M., 1995. Radiation resistance of compound semiconductor solar cells. J. Applied Phys., 78: 1476-1476.
41: Klenk, R., T. Walter, H. Schock and D. Cahen, 1993. A model for the successful growth of polycrystalline films of CuInSe2 by multisource physical vacuum evaporation. Adv. Mater., 5: 114-119.
42: Gabor, A., J.R. Tuttle, D.S. Albin, M.A. Contreras, R. Noufi and A.M. Hermann, 1994. High‐efficiency CuInxGa1-xSe2 solar cells made from (Inx,Ga1-x)2Se3 precursor films. Appl. Phys. Lett., 65: 198-200.
43: Hasoon, F.S., Y. Yan, H. Althani, K.M. Jones and R. Noufi et al., 2001. Microstructural properties of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin films used in high efficiency devices. Thin Solid Films, 387: 1-5.
44: Repins, I., M.A. Contreras, B. Egaas, C. DeHart and R. Noufi et al., 2008. 19.9 % efficient ZnO/CdS/CuinGaSe2 solar cell with 81.2 % fill factor. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl., 16: 235-239.
45: Islam, M.M., T. Sakurai, S. Ishizuka, A. Yamada and K. Akimoto et al., 2009. Effect of Se/(Ga+In) ratio on MBE grown Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film solar cell. J. Cryst. Growth, 311: 2212-2214.
46: Stanbery, B.J., 2002. Copper indium selenides and related materials for photovoltaic devices. Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci., 27: 73-117.
47: Sakurai, T., A. Yamada, K. Matsubara, S. Niki and K. Akimoto et al., 2010. Dependence of Se beam pressure on defect states in CIGS-based solar cells. Sol. Ener. Mater. Sol. Cells., 10.1016/j.solmat.2010.04.036
48: Mesa, F., C. Calderon and G. Gordillo, 2010. Study of electrical properties of CIGS thin films prepared by multistage processes. Thin Solid Films, 518: 1764-1766.
49: Guenoun, K., K. Djessas and G. Masse, 1998. Temperature distribution and transport mode in a closed space vapor transport reactor for CuInSe2 deposition. J. Applied Phys., 84: 589-595.
50: Thornton, J., T. Lomasson, H. Talieh and B. Tseng, 1988. Reactive sputtered CuInSe2. Sol. Cells, 24: 1-9.
51: Murali, K., 1988. Preparation and characterization of chemically deposited CuInSe2 films. Thin Solid Films, 167: L19-L22.
52: Potter, R.R., 1986. Enhanced photocurrent ZnO/CdS/CuInSe2 solar cells. Sol. Cells, 16: 521-527.
53: Hashimoto, Y., N. Kohara, T. Negami, N. Nishitani and T. Wada, 1998. Chemical bath deposition of Cds buffer layer for GIGS solar cells. Sol. Ener. Mater. Sol. Cells, 50: 71-77.
54: Nakada, T. and T. Mizutani, 2002. 18% efficiency Cd-Free Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin-film solar cells fabricated using Chemical Bath Deposition (CBD)-ZnS buffer layers. Jpn. J. Applied Phys., 41: L165-L167.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
55: Negami, T., T. Aoyagi, T. Satoh, S. Shimakawa, S. Hayashi and Y. Hashimoto, 2002. Cd free CIGS solar cells by dry processes. Proceedings of 29th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialist Conference, May 19-24, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp: 656-656.
56: Siebentritt, S., 2004. Alternative buffers for chalcopyrite solar cells. Sol. Energy, 77: 767-775.
57: Rau, U. and M. Schmidt, 2001. Electronic properties of ZnO/CdS/Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells -aspects of heterojunction formation. Thin Solid Films, 387: 141-146.
58: Martin, G., 1982. Solar Cells Operating Principles, Technology and System Applications. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, ISBN: 0138222703.
59: Siebentritt, S., 2002. Wide gap chalcopyrite: Materials and properties. Thin Solid Films, 403-404: 1-8.
60: Van Vechten, J.A., 2005. Confine Cu to Increase Cu-Chalcopyrite Solar Cell Voltage. In: Wide Gap Chalcopyrite, Siebentritt, S. and U. Rau (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, New York, ISBN: 10 3540-24497-2, pp: 55-68.
61: Cahen, D. and R. Noufi, 1989. Defect chemical explanation for the effect of air anneal on CdS/CuInSe2 solar cell performance. Applied Phys. Lett., 54: 558-590.
62: Niki, S., A. Yamada, H. Oyanai, T. Wada, R. Kimura and T. Nakada, 2001. Anion vacancies in CuInSe2. Thin Solid Films, 387: 129-134.
63: Hanna, G., A. Jasenek, U. Rau and H.W. Schock, 2001. Influence of the Ga-content on the bulk defect densities of Cu(In,Ga)Se2. Thin Solid Films, 387: 71-73.
64: Rau, U. and H. Schock, 1999. Electronic properties of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 heterojunction solar cells-recent achievements, current understanding and future challenges. Applied Phys. A., 69: 131-147.
65: Tuttle, J.R., J.S. Ward, T.A. Berens, M.A. Contreras and R. Noufi, 1996. The performance of Cu(In,Ga)Se2-based solar cells in conventional and concentrator applications. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 426: 143-143.
Direct Link |