Navigant Consulting's Paula Mints has highlighted that the metrics that define a technology, be it crystalline, thin-film, or concentrating solar (thermal or CPV), as appropriate for an installations >1MWp are site specific -- that is, based on the needs of the installation (insolation, BOS, cost of module, or system), the requirements of the investors (primarily rate of return), and the price at which the electricity will be sold to the end user.

The argument for one technology vs. another eventually becomes one of marketing. In marketing, the best story wins, not necessarily the best technology, Mints mentioned in a column for solid-state.com.

Mints, who is principal analyst, PV Services Program, and associate director of the energy practice at Navigant Consulting, wrote that a downturn provides a perfect foundation, again, for innovations of all types -- including marketing.

"As solar becomes a more visible energy choice, the industry will need to mature its storytelling. In this context, the selling of thin films as more appropriate for large installations than crystalline, and CSP (solar thermal) as thin film's true competitor in this regard, is interesting -- though again, not strictly accurate."

"However, the current slowing in demand gives the solar industry, and all its participants, an opportunity to hone marketing skills. In a couple of years demand will accelerate, and solar technologies should emerge as competitive with all energy technologies. The industry will need strong marketing then, even more than it does today. For that time, may the best story win. And let it be a solar story."