Production, yield and costs must be understood for US solar factories
As soon as the Inflation Reduction Act was announced in 2022, the global PV industry turned its attention to the United States, with domestic manufacturing set to have attractive production-based incentives (Section 45X credits) through the value-chain from polysilicon to modules, with First Solar’s thin-film technology treated as a single fully integrated process.
During 2023 and 2024, most of the new domestic manufacturing additions in the United States came from c-Si module factories, mainly due to the lower barrier to entry for module assembly, compared to building a new cell factory. Moreover, c-Si modules commanded the largest 45X credit levels ($0.07/W). Combined with the low capex required for c-Si module factories, this allowed new companies to enter the market and target profits quickly.
However, the U.S. market was still being supplied in high volumes by imported modules from Southeast Asia, holding back the rate of progress for new module capacity additions in the United States, while largely removing any great urgency to set up new c-Si cell (or ingot / wafer) facilities.
This changed first with the 2024 Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties (AD/CVD) on imports using cells produced in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, and then in 2026 with AD/CVD applied to production in India, Indonesia and Laos.
While various manufacturers shifted attention to setting up cell and module factories in the Middle East and Africa, these 2024 and 2026 duties effectively signalled that solar cell production in the United States had to be prioritized by companies that were serious about participating in the domestic market in the future.
By default, U.S. ingot and wafer production then got the impetus needed to be taken seriously, now that a meaningful domestic cell manufacturing sector was about to unfold.
Therefore, while the pathway to domestic U.S. manufacturing was initiated back in 2022, it was not until early 2026 that a full value-chain build-out could be considered a viable and essential pre-requisite for investments and new capex spending across ingots, wafers and cells.
Consequently, the United States has finally become a PV sector that can look at production volumes through the entire c-Si value-chain, technology selection for cell lines, factory yields, profitability and quality levels. And by design, the days of counting aspirational capacity announcements will hopefully fade into the distance.
This is why the Solar Manufacturing USA conference is being launched this year, in 2026.
US solar manufacturing in 2026: production volumes and strategic investments
The opening session sets the scene for Solar Fab-Tech USA 2026, combining a market-led overview of the domestic manufacturing base. The growth in production across the value-chain for U.S. PV manufacturing from 2020 through to a forecast for 2026 is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: By assigning thin-film production (from First Solar) across the equivalent c-Si value-chain, as defined by Section 45X credit levels, overall U.S. solar production has grown significantly from 2024 for modules and from 2025 for wafers and cells.
Historically, treating thin-film largely in isolation from c-Si value-chain production has been standard practice for any analysis of PV manufacturing. However, for the U.S. sector today, it is essential to do this differently.
The reason for this change in analysis comes from U.S. domestic manufacturing being largely exclusive to the U.S. market. Or put another way, nothing apart from some polysilicon is being exported. Therefore, every thin-film panel produced by First Solar in the United States not only takes market share away from domestic c-Si module competition, but also removes the equivalent capacity otherwise required for polysilicon, ingot, wafer and cell manufacturing in the country.
This phenomenon is even more pronounced given that First Solar’s domestic thin-film production volume accounted for about one-third of all solar modules produced in the United States in 2025, although this is set to decline in 2026 to about 25-30% and will continue to fall out to 2030 unless First Solar adds more U.S. capacity in the 2028-2030 period.
Another reason for combining thin-film with the full c-Si value-chain is to align with Section 45X definitions.
These themes will take centre stage in my opening talk at Solar Manufacturing USA bringing the industry up to date with developments through the first nine months of the year and looking forward to 2030.
US-led solar cell innovation: differentiating through technology
The next session of the conference examines how solar cell manufacturing in the United States can be built around differentiation and innovation, focusing on the cell architectures, production equipment and technology roadmaps defining the sector.
During 2023 and 2024, announcements related to PV technology were focused mainly on the modules being assembled, not the companies making the solar cells. This created a somewhat artificial climate because technology differentiation falls firmly at the cell fabrication stage, not with final module assembly.
However, starting in 2026, this imbalance has been completely turned around, due to the technology choices being made by the companies currently producing and ramping new cell factories in the United States, at odds with global trends in recent years.
This has been driven in large part by First Solar’s graduated TOPCon patent enforcement actions — moving from initial industry warnings to federal lawsuits and culminating in the latest Section 337 investigation — which have pushed domestic c-Si cell manufacturers toward PERC and heterojunction (HJT) process flow alternatives.
During 2026, U.S. c-Si cell production volumes are expected to reflect this country-specific technology differentiation, with PERC and HJT potentially accounting for about 70% of c-Si cell output. First Solar’s cell-equivalent CdTe thin-film is forecast to make up about 80% of all solar cell production in the United States in 2026.
Figure 2: Production of c-Si solar cells in the United States in 2026 is forecast to be comprised of strong contributions from PERC and heterojunction (HJT) architectures, reflecting the impact of First Solar’s patent enforcement actions dating back to its acquisition of TetraSun in 2013 and its core patents.
Factoring in First Solar’s domestic thin-film production volumes (cell adjusted), the United States in 2026 becomes the most diverse country globally in terms of solar technology, as shown in Figure 2. Indeed, such a technology split is reminiscent of the roadmaps often promoted during the early days of the solar industry some 15 years ago.
While the selection of p-type PERC cell production lines by some of the existing cell proponents in the United States can be viewed somewhat as a safe and defensive tactic, the most significant development relates to the choice of HJT by other companies.
Globally in 2025, HJT accounted for about 1% of solar cell production, a reflection of the strategies put in place almost ten years ago by the Chinese c-Si sector to advocate a cell technology roadmap based on TOPCon and back-contact architectures replacing the legacy PERC format.
During this time, the promotion of HJT as an alternative has centred largely on the actions of Chinese HJT cell producer Anhui Huasheng New Energy Technology (Huasun) and HJT turn-key equipment supplier Maxwell Technologies.
Collectively, these two companies managed to keep HJT alive as a potential technology frontrunner in the sector, while the rest of China fully embraced TOPCon as the natural evolution of cell technology after PERC.
Consequently, any company setting out a technology plan in 2026 based on HJT is coming from a different starting point in terms of product maturity, equipment availability and proven field reliability, compared to both PERC and TOPCon.
Outside the United States, the most meaningful investments in the past couple of years into HJT cells have come from Indian conglomerate Reliance Industries, largely because of its acquisition of REC Solar that had been an early promoter of HJT as a potential candidate for its cell manufacturing activities in Singapore.
Today, however, that mantle has been taken up by solar companies in the United States that are in the process of ramping new HJT lines, in particular Canadian Solar.
Indirectly, Canadian Solar — owing to its ambitious HJT cell capacity expansion in the United States in 2026 — is about to become the company that could finally show the PV industry whether HJT can be produced with high yields, at low cost and with field reliability.
Canadian Solar is in the process of ramping 2.1 GW of HJT cell capacity at its Jeffersonville, Indiana facility, with a further 4.2 GW to be added during 2027. The investment in 6.3 GW of HJT cell capacity in the United States is one of the most ambitious and potentially game-changing moves that any of the major global c-Si module suppliers has undertaken in the PV industry for a long time.
Historically, Canadian Solar has been somewhat cautious on cell manufacturing, often applying a flexible in-house / third-party approach to cell production. Since 2020, in-house cell supply for its modules has trended in the range of 70-95% annually, with Aiko Solar providing modest volumes of TOPCon cells in recent years.
In addition to the company’s on / off use of a flexible in-house / third-party cell supply strategy over the past couple of decades, Canadian Solar’s focus on cell technology has typically been more that of a follower than a leader.
This was exposed a decade ago when the company was one of the last vertically integrated manufacturers of note to move from multi to mono, before following other technology leaders into TOPCon cell build-out, which formed the basis of the company’s cell capex from 2022 until the new HJT plans in the United States.
Canadian Solar has been one of the most successful companies in the PV manufacturing space for the past couple of decades, almost unique in carving out a profitable upstream / downstream model that many others have tried to emulate over the years.
However, the proposed development of 6.3 GW of HJT cell capacity in the United States could prove to be the company’s defining moment from a technology standpoint, if this can be achieved successfully in terms of productivity, yield, profits and quality.
Benchmarking US solar factories: yields, quality and performance
The next session on Day One of Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 looks more broadly at production-line metrics for yield, quality and performance, alongside independent testing, factory audits and due-diligence processes that help validate industry benchmarks.
Since the build-out of new silicon-based manufacturing sites in the United States over the past few years, the focus on factory operations has become a largely closed-loop exercise involving the manufacturers and factory auditors, driven by checks required by downstream stakeholders.
However, the true test of manufacturing comes directly from the companies themselves through dissemination of factory metrics that properly explain the specific capex investments, production volumes, technology choice, yield rates, average fleet efficiencies, shipment volumes, inventory levels and, crucially, profitability.
Today, the most notable company in the United States sharing this level of detail is First Solar. More recently — partly on account of being U.S.-listed entities — visibility from T1 Energy and TOYO Solar has provided an early indication of the key c-Si production metrics for silicon-based U.S. manufacturing.
As more upstream capacity is now added in the United States, the winners and losers will ultimately be determined by operational profitability, field performance and correct technology choice at the cell stage, not simply by having factory audits that meet transient buying needs.
Upstream manufacturing is underway: polysilicon, wafers and vertical integration
This session at the conference will focus on the upstream transition unfolding today as U.S. solar manufacturing moves from ambition to execution in terms of vertical integration, with presentations from companies leading the way with new domestic ingot and wafer production sites.
Two companies have emerged as frontrunners in this category, Qcells (through investments from parent Hanwha Solutions) and Corning Incorporated across its Hemlock Semiconductor polysilicon operations, in-house ingot / wafer activities, and module production.
The tactics and strategies of Qcells and Corning are very different.
Qcells’ ingot-to-module plans in Georgia have been years in the making, dating back to before the Inflation Reduction Act was finalized. This follows almost a decade during which Hanwha Solutions has re-organized its global solar manufacturing operations from a diversified international model for both manufacturing and module sales to one now heavily focused on the U.S. market.
Furthermore, Qcells’ motivation — aside from being seen in the United States as a major player in the PV manufacturing space — is embedded in a self-consumed production model, in which in-house upstream products are largely retained for the company’s own module production and sales.
Corning’s move into partial vertical integration differs significantly from Qcells, both in solar manufacturing legacy and operational strategy going forward.
Previously, Corning’s polysilicon plant in Michigan (Hemlock Semiconductor) was the company’s only meaningful connection to global PV manufacturing, moving from a position of market leadership 15 years ago to a more niche player whose value-added proposition was grounded in its status as one of only three polysilicon suppliers outside China’s otherwise dominant position in the polysilicon sector.
Corning’s new solar strategy is now principally U.S.-focused and sees the company active at the ingot / wafer and module stages through different in-house vehicles. Crucially, this approach depends on the company’s ability to form a “virtual” supply chain, including third-party cell producers, and secure off-taker commitments for a portion of wafer supply and all module sales.
Therefore, Corning’s approach places the company at the heart of the U.S. PV manufacturing ecosystem, in contrast to Qcells’ strategy and in a way that Corning has not done before. This creates a fascinating dynamic moving forward.
Indeed, by the time Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 takes place in September 22 & 23, 2026, it is expected that some of the established PV manufacturers in the United States today — many building out cell capacity to add to existing module production — will be ready to share their plans to backward integrate to the ingot and wafer stages, in expectation that current supply channels for ingots and wafers made in Southeast Asia may have a time limit in terms of potential AD/CVD activity.
Building US solar factories: EPC execution, equipment supply and turnkey lines
The morning of Day Two of Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 is dedicated to building and operating solar manufacturing factories in the United States.
The first session of the morning explores the capital build-out now underway across U.S. solar manufacturing, with a focus on the companies designing, equipping and delivering the factories and production lines behind new domestic capacity.
When the initial wave of capacity expansion began in the PV industry 15-20 years ago, U.S. equipment companies were central to this phase. Key equipment suppliers included GT Advanced Technologies (former GT Solar) for ingot (“brick”) casting and Despatch Industries for cell firing furnaces. Applied Materials also had an active role in cell screen printing through its Baccini subsidiary, while putting considerable resources into its turn-key thin-film amorphous-silicon-based production lines that were, for a few years, in high demand.
Many of the new entrants across Asia relied on these equipment suppliers to establish a foothold in PV manufacturing, forming complete lines together with key tool makers in Europe including centrotherm photovoltaics, the former Roth & Rau, Meyer Burger, SCHMID Group, RENA Technologies, SEMCO Technologies, ASYS Group, Singulus Technologies and others.
As the United States began its current phase of c-Si capacity expansion, companies have been forced to source equipment from outside the country, with only limited interest until now from major capital equipment suppliers serving adjacent markets, such as semiconductor, in participating in new solar factories.
Considering also the technology differentiation discussed earlier in this article, a wide range of tool suppliers and process flows has now been called upon.
However, the build-out of new solar factories in the United States is not limited to production tools, or to a specified “turn-key” solution. Build-out also has strong engagement from factory EPCs and third-party providers of production know-how and R&D resources.
The net effect is a diverse and increasingly competitive equipment and process landscape, with customers now making decisions on technology type (PERC, TOPCon or HJT, for example) and the level of third-party support needed to establish new production lines and run them effectively.
Operating US solar factories: costs, materials and profitability
This second part of the Day Two morning activities explores the operating expenditure (opex) side of U.S. solar manufacturing, with a focus on materials supply, cost control and the factory-level economics that will determine long-term viability.
This introduces a whole new side to the U.S. PV manufacturing ecosystem. It has been gaining visibility and focus over the past 12-18 months but still needs a much more cohesive approach to domestic independence of supply.
Across the ingot-to-module stages of the c-Si value-chain, key materials include quartz crucibles (for ingot pulling), diamond wires (for wafer slicing), conductive paste (for cell metallization), and films / backsheets and glass (for module assembly).
Currently, the U.S. manufacturing sector is dependent on a small group of Chinese companies across each of these key materials. In some cases — in particular, the materials needed for module assembly — the Southeast Asia operations of Chinese companies (such as Flat Glass Group and Xinyi Solar for module glass) have been heavily utilized. However, some components, such as quartz crucibles, diamond wires and conductive pastes, remain exclusive to Chinese companies with domestic production bases only.
The dependency on Southeast Asia for backsheets / films and solar glass, in addition to junction boxes, is potentially one of the highest-risk areas for the U.S. manufacturing sector today.
The rationale for these Chinese companies having production bases in Southeast Asia in the first instance mirrors the motivation and actions of Chinese cell and module producers that set up factories in Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia years ago to supply product to the U.S. market. Therefore, the threat of specific AD/CVD on materials supply channels from Southeast Asia cannot be discounted.
Figure 3 shows the extent to which Chinese companies dominate the supply of materials for the c-Si value-chain today. The graph here shows the market share of the top three Chinese companies in 2025 across different materials supply categories.
Figure 3: A select group of Chinese companies has dominated the supply of consumables used in producing components through the solar value-chain in recent years. Within each of the main materials categories, two to three companies accounted for about 70-80% of supply during 2025, with leading companies including Metron New Material (diamond wires), DK Electronic Materials and Fusion New Material (conductive pastes), First Applied Material (films / backsheets), and Flat Glass Group and Xinyi Solar (solar glass). Production sites have been used either in China or across Southeast Asia.
Defining the US Solar PV Technology Roadmap to 100 GW by 2035
The closing session of Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 is likely to be one of the highlights of the event, focusing on an interactive assessment — involving both speakers and audience — of how the U.S. solar industry can reach 100 GW of fully integrated production by 2035 across components, materials and selected equipment categories.
The United States has had various PV roadmaps in the past, but many of these became increasingly hypothetical as China came to dominate the sector over the past 10-15 years. In addition, most U.S. roadmap thinking has tended to be skewed towards domestic technology leadership founded on U.S.-owned innovation, rather than how global technology can be used as a springboard to build manufacturing at meaningful commercial scale.
It is therefore necessary to distinguish between an aspirational domestic R&D-to-production roadmap and a commercial in-production technology roadmap.
The approach at Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 will be closer in spirit to the International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic (ITRPV), using direct manufacturer input to guide the outlook.
A realistic PV technology roadmap for the United States today has to start with the stakeholders already active in the current build-out of capacity, factor in expected capex by technology through to 2030, establish the most likely production landscape by then, and only after that assess the pathways that could take the sector to 100 GW of production by 2035.
The 2035 timeline appears realistic because the period from 2026 to 2030 can largely be seen as the initial build-out phase. This would then allow 2030 to 2035 to be viewed more as a period of technology evolution, rather than one based solely on rapid capacity growth from a low starting point.
The 100 GW target must be treated firmly as a production number, not a capacity figure. It implies production across the value-chain, supported by domestic materials supply and with a meaningful share of production equipment influenced by manufacturing activity and R&D from U.S. PV companies.
Potentially, Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 — given its focus on U.S. PV production and technology — could become an annual point at which the industry reviews and adjusts the pathway to 100 GW production by 2035.
Final thoughts
After several years in which U.S. solar manufacturing was judged mainly through capacity announcements and factory opening plans, the sector is now moving into a more meaningful phase. Production volumes, technology selection, yields, quality, operating economics and upstream integration are becoming the metrics that matter most, and these are the issues that will ultimately determine which companies emerge as long-term winners.
This is why Solar Manufacturing USA 2026 comes at the ideal time. The event is intended to give the industry a much clearer view of what is being produced today in the United States, how manufacturing strategies are evolving, and which technology and domestic supply-chain choices are likely to shape the sector over the next ten years.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those held by pv magazine.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
Popular content
