Updating the SRA
Discussion points and actions
Nicola Pearsall, November 2010
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Reasons for Updating
 The SRA refers to a specific time in regard to PV Vision
and research status
 The research status changes over time as advances are
made and solutions are found – so the topics, targets
and timescales change
 The ambition in regard to PV in Europe has shifted
significantly over the last two years (SEII and other
initiatives)
 A revised SRA is needed to reflect the changes in
ambition and to reset targets, timescales and priorities
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Proposed methodology
 Revise the introductory chapter(s) to reflect the new vision
 Decide in WG3 what this implies for the overall research priorities
and timescales
 Reconvene the technology working groups to revise each
technology section
 Revise any other chapters as required – WG3 member appointed to
lead each one
 Finalise draft within WG3
 Consult with Steering Committee and Mirror Group to finalise
document
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (1) – retaining the
existing format
 The current format consists of the Introduction (including the vision to
which the SRA refers), Governing Principles of the SRA, Development
Options, Perspectives and Needs (by technology group) and a section on
Research Funding
 There are two operational advantages of retaining the current format:

It allows us to assign working groups to each chapter immediately and so reduced the
timeline for completion of the updating

We can retain the existing layout, so reducing administrative effort, and make the revised
SRA compatible with the first edition
 Comments received so far:

Several comments approving retention of structure

Missing analyses of competition and activities in other countries

Needs priorities that are set to meet the SEII targets

Reduce Executive Summary to less than 2 pages

Need more on funding possibilities for new start ups, demo and pilot activities
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (2) – technology
sector headings
 Comments received so far:
 Storage and grid technologies for low and high penetration in a long term
scenario might be a separate sector
 Move Concentrator Technologies section to before the Emerging and Novel
Technologies
 Comment that the Emerging technologies should be included in Thin Film section
 Possibly single section for all silicon based cells
 Combine Thin Films, Concentrators and Emerging Technologies into two
sections: Enabling Technologies and High Efficiency Devices
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (3) – which sections
require updating?
 Comments received so far:
 Explanation of general issues needed to justify investment in PV at this time (why
PV is important in the future, realistic deployment scenarios, influence of R&D on
the deployment of PV, explain how cost of PV R&D can be justified against
market growth)
 BOS, safety, bankability (demonstration sites) not well represented
 Feedstock, decrease of waste and reduction of process steps for wafer based
crystalline silicon
 Extend BOS to include storage and grid connectivity
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (4) – governing
principles
 Short term research dedicated to competitiveness of European
Industry (direct link here to SEII)
 No exclusivity (i.e. all technologies included)
 Need for funding of short, medium and long term research
 Use the same cost targets for all technologies (flat plate), separated
into module and BOS
 Use combined module/BOS cost target for concentrator systems,
but also common across all approaches
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (5) – compatibility with
SEII
 The SRA should be compatible with the SEII overall vision and its
Implementation Plans, but also covers other research outside the
SEII
 It would also be helpful to use the SRA to inform the ongoing SEII
implementation plans after the first two years
 Comments received so far:
 Needs priorities that are set to meet the SEII targets
 Synchronise short term objectives with SEII Implementation Plan – medium term
should be partially compatible and long term independent of SEII
 Compare table of contents for both documents and try to harmonise the structure
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich
Discussion Points (6) – sector teams
 Comments received so far:
 Wafer based crystalline technology: Harsharn Tathgar
 Existing thin film: Marko Topic
 Emerging and novel technologies
 Concentrator technologies: Stephen Taylor (III-V devices)
 BOS components and systems: Marko Topic
 Standards, quality assurance, safety and environmental aspects
 Socio-economic and enabling research
WG 3 Meeting
30 November 2010
Brussels
Munich