As a PV power developer, the yields of the systems I design, construct and operate is the primary determinant of how good I am.  Hence, I was disturbed last night when I read the results of Photon Magazine's module test on Sharp modules.

Sharp ended up at the back of the pack on yield--almost 10% behind the test leader.  Sharp has a reputation for under-promising/over-delivering on power, which held true here--their 175Wstc modules actually tested out at 188Wstc, but the yields were dramatically off when compared to other modules.  The yields are standardized to the actual measured power of the module, not the nameplate power.  I don't understand why the yields are so low.  The test looks really comprehensive--a typically thorough German approach to getting to the numbers.

The other surprise was the Sanyo HIP series modules finished just above the Sharp modules--and this module is marketed as a high yield, triple junction module.   These modules were apparently "samples" but were bought through the distribution chain, so my concern is how do I know that I don't end up paying for "samples" rather than the real deal?  These modules are being retested at the request of Sanyo--stay tuned.

I need to really dig into this as I have several jobs in planning that I was going to specify the Sharp module on.

Update:  I traded emails with Sharp--the main takeaway is that if you look at yield on nameplate, so that they are not penalized for under-promising on power, Sharp moves into the middle of the pack, like so--