HellermannTyton offers solutions that help prevent photovoltaic panel downtimes. These solutions are designed to ensure long-term reliability, with some specifically developed for the solar sector.
Goto SUNUA to know more.
This checklist is designed to assist installers in the correct application of cable ties, clips, and clamps to solar modules.
Check it out now and learn how to find the right solution for your specific solar panel installation needs.
1. Avoid “Cable Curves”: Never tie cables in an oval shape. Oval lashings are one of the most common causes of premature failure. This type of lashing can break over time due to movement caused by thermal expansion and wind. Make sure cables run in straight lines rather than ovals.
2. Never tie cables near a metal edge without a suitable product: There is a high risk of damaging the cable sheath, which can cause short circuits and, in the worst-case scenario, a fire.
3. Use appropriate fastening clips for perforations: Use LOC series clips for mounting holes on the solar module. The clip with fir tree and LOC series clips are most suitable for photovoltaic systems. These clips not only secure cables but also enable cable tying—all in one product.
4. Use solar cable clips to avoid drilling panels: Edge clips are some of the most flexible and durable solar cable management solutions on the market. UV-stabilised and made of stainless steel, MSC2 edge clip models allow you to hold one or more cables without drilling. This ensures that cable insulation remains intact and is not exposed to the elements.
5. Take special care with cables in floating photovoltaic systems: For underwater applications or cabling exposed to moisture, ensure that cables and connectors are properly protected and managed to prevent damage.
6. Use mounting points appropriate for the number of solar modules: Cascade effects can result from incorrect sizing of the mounting points. If mounting points are not sized correctly and a fault occurs in one of the fixing elements, a cascade effect may occur, leading to energy loss and potential damage to the system.
7. Clamps for solar applications must meet a wide variety of requirements: It is crucial that clamps are made of materials resistant to UV light and can handle movements, such as those caused by solar trackers. Additionally, clamps in solar applications must withstand various temperature fluctuations.
8. Avoid exposed, sharp, or pointed edges: Sharp or pointed edges can damage cables, potentially causing short circuits.
9. Always ensure proper cable routing: Poor cable management can lead to issues such as excessive strain on junction boxes, resulting in frequent maintenance.
Once you have decided to invest in solar panels you are most likely in for a win. Based on the Energy Saving Trust's figures, it could typically take 8-12 years to recoup the costs of installing panels. From April , when the price of electricity is predicted to increase yet again, this may become a shorter timescale.
It might sound obvious, but the more you use them, the quicker the investment will pay for itself.
If you don’t have a solar battery, you'll want to put the generated energy to good use. Most providers are required to purchase the surplus energy your panels are generating through the Smart Export Guarantee (SEG) scheme. To be eligible, residential solar systems are normally required to be accredited by the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS).
The SEG rates don’t include transmission and distribution costs and therefore are lower than what you pay for when buying electricity from the grid. At the moment one of our recommended energy suppliers, Octopus Energy, offers the highest rate at 15p per kWh while EDF only gives 1.5p. Compare that to the current 34p per kWh you pay to use electricity from the grid and you will want to use every single kWh your solar panel generates, otherwise you will still have to purchase energy from the grid when the sun is not shining.
Incidentally, this is when UK households use the most electricity: in the morning and in the evening. (This is one reason why photovoltaic energy is a better fit in hotter countries, where electricity use often peaks in the middle of the day when people are using air conditioning).
Although using the generated electricity during the day may be easier said than done, there are ways. If you own an inversion heater and a hot water cylinder, then by installing a power diverter you can shift the surplus energy there. Storage heaters can also use daytime energy to heat up, releasing it during specified hours.
If not, you could make clever changes to your daily routine. Do the laundry, the dishes and the cooking (if you have an electric hob) during daylight but do one at a time so as not to overstretch the capacity of your system. If you’re not home during the day, you could set timers and perhaps invest in a slow cooker that does the job while you’re out.
If your concern is the climate, you should aim to deal with your heating first: insulate your home and consider getting a heat pump. The heat pump can be run through electricity generated on your roof.
Heating needs to be addressed at the domestic level, but electricity for this cool and breezy island could be better addressed with offshore wind farms than domestic solar panels.
The operation of solar panels – or photovoltaic (PV) systems – doesn’t create emissions while generating energy and that is one reason they are so much better than fossil fuels.
However, the environmental impact of their manufacture and disposal is significant.
Solar panels are made primarily of silicon, which is mined in open pit mines and requires high heat for proper shaping. They also contain metals and rare earth minerals, which are mined and transported.
This is all mostly done with fossil fuels and thus has a carbon footprint: a typical house array of ten panels, each with a peak capacity of 350 watts, will have an embodied carbon footprint of around two tonnes.
Our total annual carbon footprint in the UK is about 12 tonnes each, so this looks like a sizeable proportion. But solar panels last a long time - the latest solar panel models on the market have an expected lifespan of 40-50 years. Even on our gloomy and dark island their carbon footprint can be paid back in the first six years of their operation. If you live somewhere sunnier, this can go down to as little as 1.5 years.
Furthermore, the embodied carbon in the panels has been falling dramatically and it is predicted that in the not too distant future, when they are made using recycled materials, the carbon payback time will be less than half this. For the rest of the solar panels’ lifetime their overall carbon footprint drops into the negative and owners can enjoy truly carbon-free electricity, knowing that their system will save over 900 kg of CO2 per year.
This doesn’t mean that solar panel manufacturers can rest on their laurels; they can and should cut their emissions and, as solar panel manufacturers, they have the means to do so. Our carbon rating showed that most of them weren’t doing enough, with only Canadian Solar, LONGi, and Panasonic getting best ratings.
Other adverse environmental impacts of solar panels include pollution and use of hazardous materials. The chemicals used in the manufacturing process vary depending on the make and model of the panel but they generally include PVC and compounds of copper, cadmium, and gallium. Unless these are properly handled during manufacture and are recycled at end-of-life they will contaminate both soil and water.
All companies got worst ratings in the pollution and toxics category so there is plenty of scope for improvement in this area.
Companies did better on other environmental impacts such as water use and waste reduction and nine got middle ratings in our environmental reporting category: GB-Sol, LONGi, Trina, Viessmann, Canadian Solar, Sunpower, Sharp, Panasonic, and REC Solar. The rest got worst ratings.
We reviewed and rated 16 companies making solar panels and/or photovoltaic (PV) systems.
There are big ethical differences between the brands.
One company scores 0/20 points, and several others languishing near the bottom of our score table.
We assessed all companies in the guide for their carbon management and reporting. We exempted companies whose only product is solar panels from many of our usual carbon rating requirements because we consider them to be contributing to the climate transition. These companies all got a middle rating by default.
To achieve a best rating, they also had to have a credible and detailed discussion on how they had made emissions cuts in the past and would do so in the future.
Only Canadian Solar and LONGi did this because they had plans to move their operations fully to renewable energy in the next few years.
Companies which make other products were subject to our full carbon rating.
The only one to get a best was Panasonic. Sharp got a middle rating and Viessmann, REC Solar, and Hyundai all got worst.
Nearly 70% of the world’s solar cells and modules are made in China. Vietnam comes next with 8%.
Neither are countries renowned for their respect for workers’ rights. Despite publishing long sustainability reports, solar panel companies say little on workers’ rights and as a result all companies got a worst rating in our supply chain management category, apart from GB-Sol which received a best rating.
This is particularly concerning given the use of Uyghur forced labour (see below) and the fact that solar supply chains include large quantities of quartz – the mining of which is linked with silicosis – and which is often sourced from countries with poor workers’ rights regulation.
If you want to learn more, please visit our website pv cable compounds.
The solar sector did not do well on our tax rating with only GB-Sol, Vikram Solar, Hyundai, and Yingli, getting best ratings – although there was little up-to-date corporate information on Yingli so this rating may not be reliable. LONGi got a middle rating and the rest got worst ratings.
It was notable that three of the Chinese solar companies: Jinko, Suntech, and JA Solar, were headquartered or had parents who were headquartered in the Cayman Islands (on our list of tax havens). Norwegian REC Solar itself got a best rating, but its parent Reliance Industries got a worst rating.
LONGi, Canadian Solar, Sunpower, Panasonic, and REC Solar got worst ratings for their political activity. All lost marks for political lobbying in the US, some for donations to US political parties, and some for membership of the corporate lobby group, the World Economic Forum.
REC Solar did not engage in any lobbying itself but it lost marks through its fossil fuel-producing parent Reliance Industries which spent over half a million dollars on political lobbying in the US in and over a million in .
There is a high risk that Uyghur forced labour has been used in the manufacture of solar panels entering the UK. This is because most solar panels use refined silicon, known as polysilicon, to convert sunlight into electricity and the Xinjiang Region of China, where the Chinese government has placed possibly millions of indigenous Uyghur and Kazakh people in coercive labour schemes, accounts for approximately 45% of the world’s solar-grade polysilicon supply.
In , Sheffield Hallam University published a report detailing the involvement of Xinjiang-based raw material suppliers and polysilicon manufacturers in forced labour schemes.
It analysed corporate documents and showed that these companies supplied some of the world’s largest solar panel manufacturers, including several in this guide.
Internment camps and forced labour
The report explains that the Xinjiang region’s well-documented detention centres and internment camps form only a small part of a much larger scheme of labour relocation programmes, justified by the government on the grounds of poverty alleviation.
These schemes are shown to operate “within an environment of unprecedented coercion, undergirded by the constant threat of re-education and internment” meaning that refusal to participate is not an option.
Those released from internment camps are often required to work in factories located near the camps in which they were interned. People with interned family members may be told that their labour will hasten their detained family members’ release.
Worker movement is restricted, with many of the factories employing supposedly free citizens being surrounded by razor-wire and security cameras, and monitored by police.
People working in the factories are either unpaid or paid far less than the minimum wage.
Which solar companies are implicated?
The report traces the supply chains of JA Solar and LONGi to silicon and polysilicon suppliers for which it found evidence of involvement in coercive labour schemes. Jinko Solar and Trina Solar were found to have also used forced labour directly.
We deducted a mark in the human rights category from these companies.
We also deducted half a mark from Canadian Solar as, while there was no evidence of forced labour in its supply chain, it was involved in a joint venture with a company found to have used forced labour.
Other companies in this guide did not appear in the report. But given the dominance of the Xinjiang region in the world’s polysilicon supply, and the fact that polysilicon from multiple suppliers is often blended by manufacturers, any companies sourcing from China are risky.
An ethical dilemma?
This makes it hard to avoid solar panels produced using forced labour in the supply chain, and you might ask whether it’s ethical to buy solar panels at all.
We would argue that it is: the transition to renewable energy generation is essential if we’re to tackle global climate breakdown. And these kinds of systemic issues can’t be addressed through consumer choices, they need governments to take action to force sector-wide change.
The good news is that there are signs that this is already happening. A new US law preventing the import of products made with forced labour has seen solar panels made by the companies named above held at the US border or shipped back to China and there are calls for similar actions in the UK.
What can you do?
If you want to support these efforts, sign the following petitions:
You are also encouraged to contact companies direct:
In January Anti-Slavery International and partners released a guidance document for investors and a policy brief to the UK Government, to help the solar and electric vehicle industries move away from reliance on forced labour in the Uyghur Region where there is systematic persecution by the Chinese government.
They say “There is no reason that green technology should go hand in hand with human rights abuses” and “it is imperative for governments and investors to divest from the Uyghur Region and diversify sourcing locations to ensure both an ethical and stable source of inputs for solar and EV technologies.”
“Consumers must use their bargaining power with companies that sell electric vehicles and solar panels, demanding information on their supply chains and links to the Uyghur Region.”
Visit the Anti Slavery International website for more information.
The guide doesn’t cover companies manufacturing solar batteries. However, it’s important to talk about them as they are becoming increasingly popular for storing solar-generated energy but are associated with severe environmental harm and human rights abuses. Also, batteries are expensive, and not needed when you can sell the energy back to the grid.
Given supply issues, some argue that battery production should be prioritised for electric vehicles which do need them.
Lithium-ion batteries are currently the most popular type in the UK for solar energy storage.
Lithium extraction can be extremely environmentally damaging. It pollutes water sources, diverts water away from farming, produces massive waste, uses a huge amount of electricity, and increases CO2 emissions through destruction of vegetation in mining areas. Although lithium mining is currently not sustainable, lithium has the potential to do a lot of good.
As demand increases, innovations will hopefully be made to make the process better for the environment.
The world’s largest lithium mining nations are Australia, China, Chile, and Argentina. Some analysts predict that if battery power replaced oil, South America would become the “new Middle East”.
Another issue with lithium-ion batteries is the mining of the rare earth minerals they contain, such as graphite, nickel and cobalt. The ores of these minerals are typically mined in Central Africa, where regulations protecting workers’ rights are weak.
The southern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo sits atop an estimated 3.4 million tonnes of cobalt, almost half the world’s known supply. While conflict minerals such as the 3TG ones used in mobile phones are included in US and European (although not UK) regulations, cobalt isn’t. Investigation has revealed severe environmental and social impact in artisanal mines, where up to fifth of the cobalt production takes place.
Workers have complained of issues such as long working hours, lack of protective gear, and child labour.
It is expected that at least 11 million tons of used lithium-ion batteries will accumulate worldwide by . Recycling solar storage batteries is critical because they contain highly toxic materials, however it is estimated that currently only 5% are being recycled. Thankfully, the lithium battery recycling market is expanding.
Several alternatives are being researched by scientists trying to find cheaper, more environmentally friendly energy storage.
These include batteries made of salt, glass or even sea water and hemp! Some of the research is in its early stages but it is anticipated that we’ll see the first prototypes of sodium-ion batteries in the next one or two years.
For more information, please visit thermoplastic compounds.