1 / 15

Anton Milner, EPIA

Process for setting priorities for FP7 (including 1st Call). Anton Milner, EPIA. End products required from today’s Workshop 1) A joint stakeholder recommendation to PV Platform ( PV-TRAC ) as to which RTD priorities should be undertaken in the first project call for FP7

lev
Download Presentation

Anton Milner, EPIA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Process for setting priorities for FP7 (including 1st Call) Anton Milner, EPIA

  2. End products required from today’s Workshop 1) A joint stakeholder recommendation to PV Platform ( PV-TRAC ) as to which RTD priorities should be undertaken in the first project call for FP7 2) A maximum of 10 priority recommendations, divided in “Short-Term/Mid-Term” and “Mid-Term/Long Term” 3) A broad description of each of the recommended priorities ( What, Why, Benefits, Impacts, Targets ) 4) An agreed clear path forward as to how to set up the process to specify from “priority set”-to-”recommendation”-to-”project-description”-to-”project set-up”-to-”monitoring”

  3. DILEMMA : TOP-DOWN OR BOTTOM-UP ? Top-Down : The development of a long term RTD strategy including the estimation of how much funding will be required and when in order to meet learning curve and market/social benefit objectives. This should include the definition of RTD portfolio, project planning in total, budgeting requirements etc OR Bottom-Up : Pragmatic approach to essentially prioritise the currently agreed RTD projects that are in the portfolio PROPOSAL : Initially for FP7 first call we require a pragmatic “Bottom-Up” approach to be followed by a more structured “Top-Down approach” STARTING POINT : EPIA/EUREC joint Roadmap

  4. Proposed process for Priority setting ( which will get us to the 80% solution today we hope ) High level review of Industry and Research requirements High level Categorisation/ Prioritisation of Roadmap Set up the process for realisation Definition of chosen RTD priority projects • Define the criteria for ST/MT qnd MT/LT priority setting • Develop Project Description, Aims • Impacts, Benefits • Concrete Targets and Milestones • Estimated Funding requirement • HIGH LEVEL PROJECT SPECIFICATION • Review ST/MT and MT/LT weighting • Categorise Roadmap projects into ST/MT and MT/LT • Prioritise TOP 10 for the event that RTD Budget constraints require this • LIST OF TOP 10 • Set up consultancy process ( Members and to PV-Platform) • Input recommendations to PV-TRAC ( Joint recommendation ) • Establish mechanism to detail out the project descriptions and application • IMPLEMENTATION STARTED • Overall Social and Economic Benefits => the market needs • Industry Priorities • Research Priorities • OVERALL PRIORITIES TO BE INCLUDED

  5. HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OF NEEDS • Overall Social / Economic Benefits => “the market needs”: • Increase PV penetration hugely ( technology independent ) • This means : Increase availability / Reduce costs quickly ( technology independent ) • INDUSTRY NEEDS • Costs / Costs / Costs – and in the short term or a key “driver” to progress is impaired • Drastically increased material availability in next 3-4 years ( Si problem ) • Secure the key future technologies to reduce costs • RESEARCH NEEDS • Balanced Portfolio through technologies and the chain : ST / MT / LT • Wide technology development, less emphasis on technology focus, with priorities per technology sector • Q1 : DOES THIS SUMMARISE ( AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL ) THE ALTERNATIVE VIEWS ? • Q2 : THIS IMPLIES A SETTING/BALANCING OF RTD OBJECTIVES, MANY OVERLAPS…

  6. OVERALL DIRECTIONAL ROADMAP PRIORITIES • QUANTATIVE (PV TRAC): • Module 2 €/Wp 2010System3.5 €/Wp 2010 • 1 €/Wp 20202 €/Wp 2020 • The main targets are: • to decrease the investment cost for PV systems to 1-2 €/Wp (with a module cost of 0.5-1 €/Wp) by 2015 and • to decrease PV electricity cost to significantly below 0.1 €/kWh by 2015.

  7. 5 €/Wp 100% 20% 15% 0.5 €/Wp 10% 1% 1 10 100 1.000 10.000 100.000 Cumulative installed GWp PV CONTRIBUTION TOTAL 2020 2040 ELECTRICITY 1 % 26 % KEY OBJECTIVE : ACCELERATE THE LEARNING CURVE • Reaching the goals will lead to Potential at stake • step-changes in costs along • the “learning curve“ ( not just • scale dependent ) • ...will determine the future • of PV and EU competitiveness • ...time-to-market is the critical • dimension • ...and we face structural issues in • “just doing it“, particularly compared • to Japan inc. ( role of METI ) • REQUIREMENT : HIGH SPEED APPROACH ; RELIABILITY OF THE MILESTONES BEING ACHIEVED AND DISSEMINATED ; FOCUS OF EU EFFORTS ; RESOURCES LEVELS AVAILABLE ?

  8. OVERVIEW OF ROADMAP PRIORITIES (=LOTS) SYSTEMS MILESTONES TECHNOLOGY MILESTONES

  9. General goals and expected results (in ST/MT and MT/LT Categories) : • Ensure the adequate supply of cost effective raw material • Secure high solar cell efficiencies by using high qualitystarting material, excellent crystallisation and solar cell processing technologies • Ensure low consumptionof the more expensive materials, e.g. by using very thin wafers, by using low-cost contacting schemes • Secure the long lifeof modules by improving interconnection techniques and by further development in the field of materials for encapsulation and framing. • Ensure that next generation “winning” technologies are developed for the future competitiveness of the industry

  10. LISTING OF THE CRITERIA TO THINK ABOUT IN CATEGORISING AND PRIORITY SETTING: • Considering industry and research present needs • Contribute significantly to increase industry competitiveness • Economically viable and technologically feasible (Risk assessment) • Ensure continuity and coherence with previous FPs • In line with ERA, SRA and Lisbon objectives • Etc..

  11. CHOICE INSIDE GENERAL PRIORITIES at ST/MT : • ImpactTime • Cost reduction on the industrial process High ST+ • Improvement of module life time expectancy High ST+ • Wafer thickness High ST+ • Cell efficiency High ST+ • Winner Thin film and new concepts High MT+ • BIPV Discussion ST+ • Rural electrification Discussion ST+

  12. CHOICE INSIDE GENERAL PRIORITIES of technology groups at MT/LT : • Improvement of quality material with productivity increase on the overall value chain • Continuity of wafer thickness decrease • Continuity of cell efficiency increase • Thin film (develop new processes, chose correct options !) • Novel concepts (first production plant, choose correct options !) • Systems: recycling, storage (hydrogen), novel devices, etc..

  13. Considerations for each PRIORITIES : • What ? • Technology development and achievement / The Value Proposition • Why ? • Expectations in terms of potential market and competitiveness • Benefits ? • For R&D, Industry, users and society • Impacts? • Economical, environmental and sociological incl. cost impact quantification • Targets? • Technological leadership, specific target ( e.g. µ ), Cost reduction

  14. QUESTION TO THE GROUP REGARDING PRIORITY SETTING/RANKING: • WHAT DO WE SEE AS THE OVERALL HIGH LEVEL STRATEGIC RTD PRORITIES TO MAKE PV SUCCESSFUL LONG TERM ? • Costs ( and weighting between short term and long term emphasis ) ? • Availabilities in next years ? • Preparation of next generation technologies ? • Balanced and wide technology portfolio to ensure that we develop the winners ? • THESE PRIORITIES ARE ACTUALLY COMPATIBLE : DO WE NEED A STRATEGY OF : • Highly focussed high cost impact ST/MT efforts for the Si-wafer based current technology arena, PLUS • For MT/LT a wider range portfolio until the winners can be picked ( then focus ) • WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FOCUS OF BUDGET ALLOCATIONS ? • Short-Medium Term ( Horizon 2007-2012 ) = x % • Medium-Long Term ( Horizon after 2012 ) = 100-x %

  15. Process for realisation : Today: Defining and agreeing priorities ST/MT and MT/LT To Feb 2005 Specification of the projects / budgeting Input of agreed recommendation to PV Platform ( first call + direction ) Next meeting (March 2005): Assessing the overall R&D budget needs for achieving priorities Other meeting (June 2005): Precising priorities and planning for the FP7 Other meeting (October 2005): Discussion with the stakeholders in the frame of the PV technology platform

More Related