Thin Solid Films 599 (2016) 14–18

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin Solid Films

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tsf

A figure of merit to evaluate transparent conductor oxides for solar cells

using photonic flux density
J.A. Mendez-Gamboa a,⁎, R. Castro-Rodriguez b, I.V. Perez-Quintana a,
R.A. Medina-Esquivel a, A. Martel-Arbelo a,1
a
Engineering School, University of Yucatan, AP 150 Cordemex, 97310 Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico
b
Applied Physics Department, CINVESTAV-IPN Mérida, C.P. 97310, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: We report an alternative method to evaluate transparent conductor oxides (TCO) from their photonic flux den-
Received 11 September 2014 sity (PFD(hυ)) to be used in solar cells. From the transmittance spectrum (T(hυ)) in the visible region, we calcu-
Received in revised form 14 December 2015 late the PFD(hυ) and the solar photon flux-weighted transmittance (TSW) of one specific TCO with potential
Accepted 17 December 2015
application in solar cells. The photo-current density (JPH) in mA/cm2 of one specific TCO when exposed to
Available online 18 December 2015
white light is evaluated when PFD(hυ) is integrated over the whole solar electromagnetic spectrum. Finally,
Keywords:
we define a figure of merit as JPH over the TCO film sheet resistance to find the best equilibrium between the
Solar cell transmission and its electrical resistance. To carry out this work, a bibliographical search of investigations
Transparent conductor oxides about development of TCOs was extensively made to evaluate its T(hυ), TSW, PFD(hυ), JPH and the figure of
Transmittance merit that we propose. From our results, we consider that the proposed method is a good tool for a fine compar-
Photonics flux density ison of transparent conductive films in solar cell development.
Figure of merit © 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction
In recent years, the discovery of several transparent conducting ox-
ides (TCOs) of n-type has been reported. This renewed interest has aris-
en as a result of their applications as opto-electronic transparent devices
and in the solar cell industry [1–3]. Common to all TCOs applications is
the need to optimize the electrical and optical coating parameters. De-
pending on the type of device, the requirements as a transparent elec-
trode, the optical transmission and the electrical conduction of the
electrodes should exceed certain minimum values. Ideally, both param-
eters should be as large as possible, but their inter-relationship usually
excludes the simultaneous achievement of both criteria [4]. In solar
cells, the TCOs are used like front contact before the deposition of the
window layer. Those TCOs must have a specific electrical and optical
characteristic that enhances the transmission of the solar light on the
material absorbent film.
The most studied TCOs in CdTe based solar cells are: SnO2:F, ZnO:Al,
In2O3:Sn and Cd2SnO4. These metallic oxides exhibit a very high n-type
conductivity associated with an outstanding optical transparency,
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jmendez@uady.mx (J.A. Mendez-Gamboa).
1
RIP.
around 90% in visible and NIR radiation. These TCOs are generally semi-
conductor materials near to its degenerate state with a free carrier con-
centration from 1018 cm−3 to 1020 cm−3 with a resistivity b 10−4 Ω-cm
and mobility around 50 cm2-V s. In order to use TCOs in solar cells, the
sheet resistance (RSheet) must be ~ 10 Ω/sq., this implicates TCOs with
thickness ~ 100 nm or more [2].
The most widely figure of merit used to compare the performance of
TCOs is the figure of merit of Haacke [5], where the optical transmission
is selected by taking its average around 500 nm (near solar spectrum
maximum). In this context, the 500 nm region is an important one,
but the use of a narrow band is not representative of the whole ability
of the film to transmit photons.
The transmittance spectrum in the visible region (T(hυ)) is very im-
portant because it provides information of the photonic flux density
(PFD(hυ)) and of the solar photon flux-weighted transmittance (TSW).
If the T(hυ) is integrated over the whole solar spectrum, it is possible
to evaluate the photo-current density (JPH) that a TCO will produce
when it is exposed to white light, and then evaluate this integral PFD
(IPF) over the RSheet of the film in order to find the best equilibrium be-
tween the transmission and resistance properties of those TCOs.
Consequently, instead of using a narrow band transmittance, we
propose the use of the air mass 1.5 global (AM1.5g) photon flux spec-
trum to analyze the maximum photo-current density (JPH)max for a par-
ticular TCO. Where the (JPH)max must be obtained in the range of solar

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2015.12.038
0040-6090/© 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V.
 J.A. Mendez-Gamboa et al. / Thin Solid Films 599 (2016) 14–18 15

energy spectrum of absorber material band gap (EG) to TCO band gap

mA cm−2 Ohm−1
(ETCO) used as the front contact in a solar cell. Then, the proposed figure
of merit is defined by the ratio between (JPH)max and RSheet.

Fig. Mer.

5.61
2.73
0.82
0.48
0.29
1.92
1.50
2.15
1.66
1.93
2.45
1.51
0.93
1.85
2. TCO characterization

In solar cells, a semiconductor PN junction converts radiation energy

into electrical energy. The (JPH)max that the junction can provide to an
external load is related to the number of photons with energy above
EG which cross the TCO used normally as transparent front contact of

92.4⁎⁎⁎
89.0⁎⁎
89.6⁎⁎
97.9⁎⁎
92.8⁎⁎
92.7⁎⁎
93.6⁎⁎
84.2⁎⁎
95.1⁎⁎
74.4⁎⁎
69.9⁎⁎

95.4⁎⁎
97.3⁎⁎
96.9⁎⁎
solar cells, for example TCO/CdS/CdTe.
%
Photonic characterization

The integral photonic flux (IPF), which represents the maximum

photocurrent density of an ideal cell, is defined as:

EZTCO
−2

ðJPH Þ max ¼ e PFDðhνÞ dðhνÞ ð1Þ

(JPH)max

mA cm

24.15
24.06
26.29
24.92
24.89
25.12
22.60
25.53
19.97
18.76
24.79
25.61
26.13
26.02
Eg

where e is the electron charge, ETCO is the band gap energy of the TCO
layer, and EG is the band gap energy of the absorption layer, PFD(hν)
is the photon flux density of energy hν. PFD(hν) is defined as:
Fig. Mer.
−1

0.0155
0.0374
0.0127
0.0057
0.0014
0.0059
0.0147
0.0299
0.0235
0.0069
0.0139
0.0206
0.0079
0.0207
Ohm

IS ðhνÞ TðhνÞ
PFDðhνÞ ¼ ð2Þ
Haacke characterization

hν

where IS(hυ) is the irradiance of the standard AM1.5g solar spectra

T(500 nm)

global and T(hυ) the transmittance spectrum of a particular TCO in

the wavelength range 300–1200 nm. In thin film solar cells the figure
76.291
89.476
91.417
88.629
81.258
77.47
86.06
90.20
88.12
76.37
88.00
89.89
85.90
88.30

of merit for a TCO performance is defined as the ratio of the electrical

%

conductivity to the optical absorption coefficient of the film. The most

widely figure of merit used, the one proposed by Haacke [6] defined by:

T10
Band Gap

φ¼ ð3Þ
RSheet
3.50
3.38
3.44
4.00
3.95
3.78
3.62
3.67
3.79
3.67
3.65
3.51
3.35
3.44
eV

where T is the optical transmission average around 500 nm (near the

solar spectrum maximum) and RSheet the sheet resistance. The Haacke's
figure of merit has been used by many authors for transparent
conducting film characterization in solar cell development [7–9]. The
RSheet

Ω/sq.

11.9⁎
12.0⁎
9.7⁎
32.0
52.1
86.5
13.1
15.1

16.7
27.8
13.9
4.3
8.8

20⁎

500 nm region is important, but the use of such narrow band in the fig-
⁎⁎⁎ Of (Jph)max = 26.82 mA cm−2 (ideal TCO on PräzisionsGlas&Optik Float glass).

ure of merit definition is not representative of the whole ability of the

film to transmit photons. Additionally, recent work on CdS/CdTe solar
cells points out the need of increasing the absorption of photons with
different energies to be converted into photocurrent [10]. Therefore, it
⁎⁎ Of (Jph)max = 26.85 mA cm−2 (ideal TCO on Corning 7059 glass).
⁎ Reported by author. In another case, estimated from author data.
Thickness

is important to have a better criterion to describe the cell performance

500 nm⁎
320 nm⁎
140 nm⁎
100 nm⁎

330 nm⁎
580 nm⁎
150 nm
135 nm
481 nm
70 nm⁎

at a wider spectrum range.

330
360
380
nm

Thereafter, instead of the transmittance near 500 nm and a narrow

–

band, we use the (JPH)max of a particular TCO to define a figure of

merit as:

ðJPH Þ max
In4Sn3O12

In4Sn3O12

ΘPH ¼ : ð4Þ
CEC020B
Material

ZnO:Va

RSheet
SnO2
CTO
ITO
Photonic characterization of TCOs.

This equation does not include any exponent, as the Haake's one, be-
cause (JPH)max has defined physical units and meaning. This figure of
TCOs characteristics

merit offers a better insight into the contradictory roll of optical and
electrical properties of TCO in solar cell applications, since the ideal
cell photocurrent is determined by the numerator of Eq. 4, while the
[11]Fig. 10

[12]Fig. 4

[13]Fig. 1

[14]Fig. 5

Joule-effect losses are proportional to the denominator. Furthermore,

Tcurv.
Table 1

it represents a numerical physically based value, easy to compute

Ref.

using standard measurements in TCO.

16 J.A. Mendez-Gamboa et al. / Thin Solid Films 599 (2016) 14–18

Table 2
High efficiency CdS/CdTe solar cells with different TCOs.

Solar cell characteristics Experimental values

Reference TCO Efficiency RSheet Jsc Fig. Mer.

% Ohm/sq. mA cm−2 %* mA cm−2 Ohm−1

[4] In2O3:F 14.0 5⁎ 25.4 94.6 5.08

[19] SnO2:F 15.8 7⁎ 25.09 93.4 3.58
10⁎ 2.51
[20] SnO2:F 15.5 7⁎ 24.02 89.5 3.43
10⁎ 2.40
[21] SnO2:F 14.6 5⁎ 24.4 90.9 4.88
10⁎ 2.44
[22]Table 1 SnO2ZTO 14.4 12⁎ 23.50 87.5 1.96
15⁎ 1.57
[23] SnO2:F 13.4 10⁎ 21.9 81.6 2.19
⁎ of (JPH)max = 26.85 mA cm−2 (ideal TCO on corning 7059 glass).

3. Methodology 3.2.2. Sheet resistance

3.1. Data gathering
In order to carry out this work, a bibliographical search of investiga-
tions about development of TCOs was made. Six of them, which directly
reported the spectral transmittance curves, were picked [11–14]. Pref-
erence was given to those, which in addition, had reported the band
gap values and/or sheet resistance.
3.2. Unreported data calculation
3.2.1. Gap energy
In those cases where the band gaps were not reported [11–13], these
values were calculated from the transmittance measurements, with the
Tauc formalism [15]. For the calculus we neglected the reflectance and
interference. The energy band gap is determined by extrapolating a
straight line to the energy axis, where the straight line is obtained by lin-
ear regression of the values of (αhν)2 vs. photon energy in the region of
maximum absorption; where α is the absorption coefficient per length
unit.
When the RSheet was not reported, it was calculated using the curves
of resistivity and thickness. If the film thickness (t in cm) and the resis-
tivity (ρ in Ω cm) are known, the RSheet could be calculated by
ρ
Rsheet ¼ : ð5Þ
t
3.2.3. Thickness
When thickness was unknown, it was evaluated using the curves of
spectral transmittance and the methodology reported by Swanepoel
[16] and Torres [17].
3.3. Figure of merit determination
For an specific TCO and absorbent material, we calculated the maxi-
mum photocurrent density from Eq. (1), and the figure of merit from
Eq. (4) using the spectral transmittance curves, the sheet resistance
for TCO, the band gap of the absorbent materials and the standard
AM1.5g solar spectra [18]. The proposed figure of merit could be used
for any kind of thin films solar cells with TCO; we selected CdTe thin

Table 3
CdS/CdTe solar cells and it'sTCOs.

CdS/CdTe solar cells

Reference TCO Efficiency Thickness RSheet Experimental values

Jsc Fig. Mer

% nm Ohm/sq. mA-cm−2 %⁎ mA-cm−2-Ohm−1

[3] CTO/ZTO 16.5 100 8 25.88 96.4⁎ 3.23

300 7 3.70
[24] SnO2:F 10.1 500 20 27 101.9⁎⁎ 1.35
ITO 8.3 100 17 26 98.1⁎⁎ 1.53
ITO/SnO2:F 4.6 240 7 20.2 76.2⁎⁎ 2.89

TCOs

Reference TCO – Thickness RSheet Photonic characterization

(JPH)max Fig. Mer.

– nm Ohm/sq. mA-cm−2 % mA-cm−2-Ohm−1

[3] Fig. 1 CTO – 180⁎ 10.0⁎ 25.13 93.6⁎ 2.51

[24] Figs. 2, 3 and 4. SnO2:F – 500⁎ 20 21.32 80.5⁎⁎ 1.07
ITO – 100⁎ 17 24.52 92.5 1.44
ITO/SnO2:F – 240⁎ 7 23.29 87.9⁎⁎ 3.33
⁎ Of (JPH)max = 26.85 mA cm−2 (ideal TCO on Corning 7059 glass).
⁎⁎ Of (JPH)max = 26.5 mA cm−2 (ideal TCO on soda lime glass).
 J.A. Mendez-Gamboa et al. / Thin Solid Films 599 (2016) 14–18
Fig. 1. In the upper figure, the transmittance curves of In4Sn3O12 samples grown at
different thicknesses are presented [11], and from this, the Haacke Figure of Merit and
the one proposed in this work are shown in the lower part of the figure.
Fig. 2. In the upper figure, the transmittance curves of three different TCO samples (ITO,
CTO and SnO2) with comparable sheet resistivity are presented [13], and from this, the
Haacke Figure of Merit and the one proposed in this work are shown in the lower part
of the figure.
17
films solar cells because these devices have been widely investigated
and they show high efficiency energy conversion.
4. Results and discussion
For CdTe, EG = 1.49 eV thus, the value of maximum photocurrent
density computed by Eq. (1) is 29.36 mA-cm−2 which is the maximum
photocurrent available from a CdTe cell under the standard AM1.5 glob-
al spectrum normalized to 100 mW-cm−2 with an ideal TCO of 100%
transmittance upon the whole solar spectrum. The (JPH)max of TCOs
used in the record efficient CdTe based solar cell [2] only reached the
88% of this maximum value. This is because of the transmittance
of TCO in transparent region never reaches 100%. Assuming
(JPH)max ~ 25 mA-cm− 2(88% of maximum value) as the maximum
value of a specific TCO with RSheet = 10 Ω/sheet as standard resistance
sheet value of a TCO for solar cells application, the value of the figure
of merit ΘPH defined from Eq. 4 must be ~2.5 mA-cm−2-Ω−1 or more.
The figure of merit of a good TCO to be used in solar cells based CdTe
must be above this value.
To compare some commonly used TCOs in solar cells, under the de-
fined figure of merit concept of this work, Table 1 and Table 2 were con-
structed taken data from literature [11–14]. For Table 1, the photonic
characterization values, (JPH)max and ΘPH are calculated from Eqs. (1)
and (4) respectively for different TCOs, using their different characteris-
tics as thickness, band gap and RSheet. From reference [11] we calculate
the TCO photonic characterization of In4Sn3O12, the (JPH)max was evalu-
ated between 24 and 26 mA-cm−2, while the figure of merit increases
as the thickness increases, reaching values up to 5.61 mA-cm−2Ω− 1
for a 500 nm thickness, making this TCO an excellent material for
solar cells application. In reference [14], the SnO2 TCOs, ITO and CTO
have also been reported. From the calculus of their (JPH)max and figure
of merit, CTO has the optimum requirement of (JPH)max and figure of
merit for its application in solar cells, however SnO2 and ITO are also ap-
propriate for their use in solar cells, because their photonic characteriza-
tion is close to the optimum values.
Fig. 3. In the upper figure, the transmittance curves of In4Sn3O12 films prepared at RT and
350 °C[12], and from this, the Haacke Figure of Merit and the one proposed in this work are
shown in the lower part of the figure.
18 J.A. Mendez-Gamboa et al. / Thin Solid Films 599 (2016) 14–18
In Table 2 on the left, the main characteristics of high efficiency CdS/
CdTe solar cells are presented, which were obtained from literature [4],
[19–23]. On the right, the experimental photocurrent density, its per-
centage comparing with the theoretical maximum photocurrent densi-
ty (JPH)max and the calculus of the proposed figure of merit obtained
from Eq. (4) are given. Table 3, shows a comparison between CdS/
CdTe solar cells with different TCOs; in the upper part of table, experi-
mental values are shown, obtained from references [3,24] respectively.
In the bottom we present the photonic characterization of the used
TCO, obtained from literature [3,24]. A good TCO should be one with a
figure of merit up to 2.5 mA-cm−2-Ohm−1; then, according to theoret-
ical characterization, CTO and ITO/SnO2:F accomplished this condition.
It is possible to see in Table 3, that the best efficiency solar cell is the
one obtained by Wu [3] with the use of CTO as TCO.
In the upper graph of Fig. 1 we show the transmittance curves of
In4Sn3O12 samples, with different thicknesses (20 nm, 70 nm, 100 nm,
140 nm, 320 nm and 500 nm) [11]; we limit the abscissa coordinates
to the photon energies used to evaluate the PFD; the Haacke figure of
merit and the one proposed in this work are shown in the bottom
graph of Fig. 1 for a proper comparison. The Rsheet of the 500 nm film
is lower than the one with a 320 nm thickness (4.3 Ω-sq. vs 8.8 Ω-sq.,
respectively) and the transmittance at 2.48 eV in both cases is similar
(~ 80%). With the use of the Haacke figure of merit, the 500 nm film
gets a better qualification; on the other hand, the figure of merit pro-
posed in this work selects the 320 nm film as the best, because the inte-
gral of the photonics flux in the proper wavelength limits, gives a higher
value for the thinner film than the thicker, although with the higher
electrical resistance of the thinner one.
In Fig. 2, a comparison of three different TCOs (CTO, ITO and SnO2)
with similar sheet resistance (11.9, 12 and 9.7 Ω-sq., respectively) is
shown; for those films at 2.48 eV, the transmittance curves take similar
values for CTO and ITO films (~80%), and 70% for SnO2, then, the Haacke
figure of merit considered that the ITO and CTO are better than SnO2 as
TCO. In contrast, the proposed figure of merit, considered that SnO2 film
is a better TCO than ITO for CdTe solar cells. This is because the proposed
figure of merit considers the PFD, instead of only the transmittance at
2.48 eV. In both cases, the best TCO is CTO.
The analyses of In4Sn3O12 films grown at room temperature and at
350 °C, used as TCO in CdTe solar cells, are showed in Fig. 3. Both films
have similar Rsheet (15.1 y 13.1 Ω-sq., respectively), but in this case,
Haacke figure of merit selects the film grown at room temperature as
the better TCO, whereas that our figure of merit selects as the best
TCO, the one grown at 350 °C.
5. Conclusions
We report an alternative method to evaluate transparent conductor
oxides (TCO) from its photonic flux density (PFD(hυ)) measurements,
to be used in solar cells based on CdTe films. From the transmittance
spectrum (T(hυ)) in the visible region, we measure the PFD(hυ) and
the solar photon flux-weighted transmittance (TSW) of one specific
TCO with potential application in solar cells. The photo-current density
(JPH) in mA/cm2 of one specific TCO when is exposed to white light is
evaluated when PFD(hυ) is integrated over the whole solar electromag-
netic spectrum. Finally, we define a figure of merit as JPH over the TCOs
films sheet resistance (RSheet) to find a better equilibrium between the
transmission and its electrical resistance, based on the measurement
of its photonics flux density (PFD), instead of the usual one formulated
by Haacke. The advantage of the proposed figure of merit is that the
PFD(hυ) is integrated over the whole solar electromagnetic spectrum,
instead of using the optical transmission average for a single wave-
length (around 500 nm near the solar spectrum maximum). Currently,
the computer systems allow the simple calculus of the PFD Integral
over the whole solar spectrum; this calculus was not simple in the
time when Haacke proposed its figure of merit. This work could be use-
ful to determine an optimum TCO depending on the used absorbent ma-
terial in thin film solar cells.
Acknowledgments
The authors, J.A. Méndez-Gamboa, I.V. Perez-Quintana and R.A.
Medina-Esquivel would like to thank the partial support of FOMIX Pro-
ject YUC-2011-C09-169739. This work has also been supported under
Project No. CB/1012/178748 CONACYT/México.
References
[1] J.F. Wager, D.A. Keszler, R.E. Presley, Transparent Electronics, Springer, New York,
2008.
[2] W. Wenwen, W. Tianmin, Effects of atomic oxygen irradiation on transparent con-
ductive oxide thin films, Chin. J. Aeronaut. 20 (2007) 464–468.
[3] X. Wu, High-efficiency polycrystalline CdTe thin-film solar cells, Sol. Energy 77
(2004) 803–814.
[4] N. Romeo, A. Bosio, V. Canevari, M. Terheggen, L. Vaillant Roca, Comparison of differ-
ent conducting oxides as substrates for CdS/CdTe thin film solar cells, Thin Solid
Films 431–432 (2003) 364–368.
[5] A.L. Dawar, J.C. Joshi, Semiconducting transparent thin films: their properties and
applications, J. Mater. Sci. 19 (1984) 1–23.
[6] G. Haacke, New figure of merit for transparent conductors, J. Appl. Phys. 47 (1976)
4086–4089.
[7] Z. Zhao, V. Komin, V. Viswanathan, D.L. Morel, C.S. Ferekides, Application of tin-
doped cadmium oxide films in CdTe/CdS solar cells, Photovoltaic Specialists Confer-
ence, 2000, Conference Record of the Twenty-Eighth IEEE. 2000, pp. 662–665.
[8] M. Soliman, M.M. Hussein, S. El-Atawy, M. El-Gamal, Effect of fluorine doping and
spraying technique on the properties of tin oxide films, Renew. Energy 23 (2001)
463–470.
[9] X. Li, W. Miao, Q. Zhang, L. Huang, Z. Zhang, Z. Hua, The electrical and optical prop-
erties of molybdenum-doped indium oxide films grown at room temperature from
metallic target, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 20 (2005) 823.
[10] X. Wu, J. Zhou, A. Duda, J.C. Keane, T.A. Gessert, Y. Yan, R. Noufi, 13·9%-efficient CdTe
polycrystalline thin-film solar cells with an infrared transmission of ~50%, Prog.
Photovolt. Res. Appl. 14 (2006) 471–483.
[11] T. Minami, Y. Takeda, S. Takata, T. Kakumu, Preparation of transparent conducting
In4Sn3O12 thin films by DC magnetron sputtering, Thin Solid Films 308–309
(1997) 13–18.
[12] T. Minami, T. Kakumu, K. Shimokawa, S. Takata, New transparent conducting ZnO–
In2O3–SnO2 thin films prepared by magnetron sputtering, Thin Solid Films 317
(1998) 318–321.
[13] X. Wu, R.G. Dhere, J. Zhou, A. Duda, C. Perkins, Y. Yan, H.R. Moutinho, High-quality
cadmium stannate transparent conductive oxide film for tandem thin-film solar
cells, Photovolt. Energy Convers., 2003. Proc. of 3rd World Conference on. 1 2003,
pp. 507–510.
[14] T. Miyata, S. Suzuki, M. Ishii, T. Minami, New transparent conducting thin films using
multicomponent oxides composed of ZnO and V2O5 prepared by magnetron
sputtering, Thin Solid Films 411 (2002) 76–81.
[15] J. Tauc, R. Grigorovici, A. Vancu, Optical properties and electronic structure of amor-
phous germanium, Phys. Status Solidi B 15 (1966) 627–637.
[16] R. Swanepoel, Determination of surface roughness and optical constants of inhomo-
geneous amorphous silicon films, J. Phys. E Sci. Instrum. 17 (1984) 896.
[17] J. Torres, J.I. Cisneros, G. Gordillo, F. Alvarez, A simple method to determine the op-
tical constants and thicknesses of ZnxCd1 − xS thin films, Thin Solid Films 289
(1996) 238–241.
[18] M.A. Green, Silicon solar cells: advanced principles & practice, Centre for Photovol-
taic Devices and Systems, University of New South Wales, 1995.
[19] J. Britt, C. Ferekides, Thin-film CdS/CdTe solar cell with 15.8% efficiency, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 62 (1993) 2851–2852.
[20] C. Ferekides, J. Britt, CdTe solar cells with efficiencies over 15%, Sol. Energy Mater.
Sol. Cells 35 (1994) 255–262.
[21] T.L. Chu, S.S. Chu, J. Britt, C. Ferekides, C. Wang, C.Q. Wu, H.S. Ullal, 14.6% efficient
thin-film cadmium telluride heterojunction solar cells, IEEE Electron Device Lett.
13 (1992) 303–304.
[22] T. Gessert, X. Wu, R. Dhere, H. Moutinho, S. Smith, M. Romero, J. Zhou, A. Duda, Ad-
vances in the in-house CdTe research activities at NREL, 2004 DOE Solar Energy
Technologies, 2005.
[23] T.L. Chu, S.S. Chu, C. Ferekides, C.Q. Wu, J. Britt, C. Wang, 13.4% efficient thin-film
CdS/CdTe solar cells, J. Appl. Phys. 70 (1991) 7608–7612.
[24] S.N. Alamri, Effect of transparent conductive oxide stability on CdS/CdTe solar cell
performance, Jpn J. Appl. Phys. 41 (2002) L1052.