Maxeon Solar Technologies, a major PV module producer based in Singapore, revealed the results of a third-party energy payback performance evaluation of its Maxeon 3 panels in its 2021 annual sustainability report.
Energy payback is the period required for a renewable energy system to generate the same amount of energy that was used to produce the system itself. The assessment considers the cumulative energy demand over all the life cycle stages of solar panels and considers local grid efficiencies for different global locations.
The test found that Maxeon 3 solar panels had an energy payback period ranging from 0.13 to 0.45 years for ground mounted module, and 0.27 to 0.92 years for a residential rooftop system. For ground mounted panels, the energy payback period can be as little as 47.5 days.
Spread over the 40-year performance warranty on the panels, the energy output exceeds the input more than 100 times over its lifetime, marking a significant milestone for the sustainability of PV technology.
“Maxeon strives to maintain its sustainability leadership position in the solar industry by continuing our development of more efficient, sustainable and longer-lasting panels that can ensure easy access to solar for all. As more countries and corporations pledge to achieve net-zero emissions, renewable energy will play a pivotal role in enabling this transition. Maxeon is delighted to be a key player in the race to achieving net-zero by supporting the growing demand for solar energy coupled with social and governance best practices.” Jeff Waters, Chief Executive Officer of Maxeon Solar Technologies
Sustainability Report 2021
Maxeon shared in its 2021 sustainability report that it delivered 899 MW of clean energy in 2021, namely its solar panels. The company’s impact led to over 52 million tons of carbon emissions abatement that year.
It committed to decreasing both the energy intensity and carbon intensity of manufacturing its panels from 2020 levels by 10% in 2025 and 20% in 2030. It also seeks to cut water use by 5% and waste creation by 20% by 2030.
For social goals in its ESG report, the company reported an industry-leading low rate of workplace safety incidences, and it has zero cases of non-compliance with human rights laws. It seeks to boost its traceability even further by 2025 by putting its supply information on blockchain, making supplier data is available within 4 hours of inquiry.
In 2021 the manufacturer introduced the Air panel, a thin, flexible module designed to be adhered to low weight load bearing commercial roofs, which the company said represents a 4 GW market unserved by traditional solar panels that are too heavy for such structures.
The panel manufacturer also announced it joined the Singapore Low Carbon Network as an inaugural member as part of PwC Singapore’s Asia Pacific Centre for Sustainability Excellence. It formed new partnerships with Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore and National University of Singapore for continued advancement of its technology.
“With less than ten years left to meet the UN’s 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, renewable energy will be a key engine powering both Singapore’s and the world’s decarbonization agenda. We warmly welcome Maxeon Solar Technologies to the United Nations Global Compact and look forward to working alongside them to take decisive action for the Sustainable Development Goals,” said Esther Chang, Executive Director, Global Compact Network Singapore.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
This is disingenuous. The report only looked at the energy usage of their own company and did not actually look at the entire supply chain.
Their scope 3 emissions are limited to business travel and employee commute. Hardly an honest reporting of indirect emissions, which makes the estimated break even point on energy production far, far higher than what they are claiming.
Every other report I’ve read on total indirect emissions comes with either an indication of negative energy benefit (you never generate enough to pay back making the panel) to a very slight benefit assuming full utilization to estimated end of panel life and no defects.
An energy payback of less than a single year is at least 10x more than anything I’ve read before. You should’ve been skeptical when you read this.
Hi Justin, we would be interested in learning more about this. Can you provide any sources to energy payback reports where you’ve seen those different results?
The main paper which started me on the path towards solar EROI skepticism was Ferroni and Hopkirk (2016) whose analysis led me to conclude that the standard scope of emissions/energy usage counted was grossly misrepresentative of actual industrial usage and net society effects. The common critique of the paper was that it defied convention, but that critique falls when the convention itself is flawed, as is the case here where the IEA standards miss what appears to be vast quantities of energy usage that real life demands be accounted for.
For a common sense approach to solar EROI, ask yourself why communities with high solar energy growth also experience high electricity cost growth. If you had a high EROI, you’d expect solar power to negatively correlate with energy prices. Instead, we see the opposite.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45436 Just look at 2019’s wholesale solar electricity costs. This isn’t what a high EROI would imply.
You could also look at Germany’s soaring electricity costs, less the recent kerfuffle over Russia/Ukraine, and see that their massive push for renewable energy, of which solar was a massive part, hasn’t done anything to help with costs. It has, in fact, done the opposite, requiring vast subsidies to provide costlier energy.
Over 40 years?
Pff!
Solar panels have barely been around for a good 15 years. Some cheaper panels won’t even last 2 years, before output is significantly reduced, or the cause of environmental or mechanical damage, or high heat or high shade causes panel efficiency drops.
In theory this sounds nice, in practice however, the number get slashed in 2 (to 50x), when taking real lifetime operability in consideration, and cut in half again when taking realistic efficiencies in consideration (like weather, angle, heat, etc…).
So from 100x down to 25x AT BEST!!!
The EROEI obviously includes the energy inputs, such as coal (or solar) generated electricity to make the doped silicon. To say they actually included the energy needed for employee transport is a plus!
Hey Justin,
I love the article you posted by EIA, however I think you may be understanding it differently than it was intended.
What it is saying is that solar produces when prices of electricity are the highest (when the sun is shining and when AC is needed). And because prices are highest in California, where a majority of the solar is, it is being paid well for when prices are highest.
Compare that to wind, which is competing with nuclear at night when no one needs power, so wholesale prices are lower. Especially in windy states. With enough solar, we will start to see daytime demand on the grid bottom out, and prices will also bottom out. But until that time, any power plant will try to run on the most economical performance. For nuclear, that means steady output, for solar that means when sun is shining.
So until natural gas plants stop keeping the price of electricity high, (as natural gas is the majority of the grid and so it sets the marginal price), and is replaced with lower cost solar, the prices paid for for electricity will remain high.
This is just simple law of Supply and Demand. We lower prices by increasing supply or lowering demand.
Wow that’s great
Is maxeon solar panels the best?
If their wafers still come from China, other PV Mag and news articles say coal fired generation is the main and growing generating source for making silicon and wafers from it. Be better if green and nuclear sources provided it. And even better if it was ALL Made in America.
That would focus the supply train on utility scale solar instead of 4X more costly and much less efficient subsidized reaidential rooftop installations to reach future goals more quickly.
I’m really surprised the 100 fold over 40 years is so low. That’s not very impressive to me. I would think the Energy Output would be 100 fold by Just one year or sooner. Just how much energy is needed to make a single panel?
Show me what solar panel can last 40 years in the tropical harsh sun of Cairns ?All and every panels I know of have to be replace between 12 and 15 years and they stat losing efficiency very fast after only 4 years.