Poly Standard Solar Panel | Residential, cost-sensitive projects | Power: 270W–▲285W (IEC 61215), Poly-crystalline silicon (ASTM F792), 16.5% efficiency (ISO 9050) | Cost-effective (▲285W tier offers 5.6% higher output than base), space-efficient | Lower efficiency than monocrystalline (▲ tiers mitigate but don’t eliminate this) |
Mono High-Efficiency | Urban rooftops, high-space-cost areas | Power: 300W+ (IEC 61215), 20% efficiency (ISO 9050), Black aesthetic design (ASTM D523) | Higher energy output (▲20% efficiency vs poly), sleek appearance | Higher upfront cost, sensitive to shading (▲ requires optimized installation) |
Thin-Film Flexible | Curved roofs, portable systems | Power: 150W–200W (ASTM G173), Flexible substrate (ASTM D882), Lightweight (5 kg/m²) | Versatile installation (curved surfaces), lightweight (ideal for transport) | Lower efficiency (▲12% vs mono), higher degradation rate (▲ needs frequent checks) |
Bifacial Dual-Side | Ground-mounted, reflective environments | Power: 280W–300W (IEC 61215), Dual-side light capture (▲10–25% extra energy), Durability (IEC 61730) | 10–25% more energy (▲ in open spaces), rugged design | Higher cost (▲20% vs poly), requires clear backside for optimal performance |
Amorphous Silicon | Low-light regions, partial shading | Power: 180W–220W (IEC 61215), Shade tolerance (▲30% output in partial shade), Thin profile (2 mm) | Better in diffuse light (▲15% efficiency in cloudy climates), durable | Lower efficiency (▲14% vs mono), larger footprint needed for same output |
Perovskite Experimental | R&D, niche applications | Power: 25%+ efficiency (lab-tested, ASTM E903), Ultra-thin (0.1 mm), Lightweight (▲50% vs glass) | High potential (▲25% efficiency in labs), flexible, low material cost | Unproven longevity (▲5-year lifespan vs industry standard 25 years), not commercialized |