Table 2.

Comparison of solar cells

Type of solar cell	Efficiency	Advantage	Disadvantage	Reference
Monocrystalline	15−24%	The solar cells have high conversion efficiency, advanced technology, and high reliability	The manufacturing process is challenging due to high prices, high silicon consumption, and high production volume	Zhang et al.109
Polysilicon	14–20.4%	The material may be manufactured on low-cost substrates at a substantially lower cost than monocrystalline materials.	Because of the enormous quantity of silicon consumed and the high cost of manufacture, the process is difficult.	Dallaev et al.110
Amorphous silicon (a-Si)	8–13.2%	The product is cost-effective, easy to mass-produce, has a high optical absorption coefficient, low dark conductivity, and a good response to weak light	Because of the light-induced recession effect, conversion efficiency and stability are low	Idda et al.111
Cadmium Telluride (CdTe)	Theoretical: 28%	It boasts an ideal band gap, high light absorption rate, high conversion efficiency, stable performance, simple structure, and low cost	The mining manufacturing is grappling with significant challenges, including limited natural tellurium deposits, high module and material costs, and the presence of hazardous cadmium	Michael A. Scarpulla et al.112
Copper-indiumgallium-diselenide (CIGS)	Up to 20%	The device is cost-effective, non-recessionary, and offers excellent weak light performance, broad substrate applicability, adjustable optical band gap, and strong antiradiation ability	The task of precisely managing four components in rare materials is extremely difficult	Zhou et al.113