Cost, energy and emissions assessment of organic polymer light-emitting device architectures

Catrice M. Carter, Justin Cho, Aaron Glanzer, Nikola Kamcev, Deirdre M O'Carroll

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Proponents for sustainable alternative lighting and display options advocate for organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), particularly polymer-based organic light-emitting diodes (P-OLEDs), because of their potential for low-cost fabrication, more versatile device formats and lower power consumption compared to traditional options. Here, an economic, energy and CO2 emissions assessment is carried out for four different laboratory-scale, blue-emitting P-OLED device architectures: bottom-emitting conventional; bottom-emitting inverted; top-emitting conventional; and top-emitting inverted. Additionally, comparisons with a standard, commercial-scale, blue inorganic light-emitting diode (LED) device architecture are made. The various P-OLED device architectures are investigated due to their potential to increase operational lifetime (inverted) and light out-coupling efficiency (top-emitting). The following metrics are used in this assessment: device cost per area; yearly operating cost; optical power cost; CO2 emissions from device production; and yearly operating CO2 emissions. We show that the top-emitting inverted device architecture significantly reduces the device cost per area, yearly operating cost, optical power cost and CO2 emissions for the P-OLED devices, due to elimination of indium tin oxide and its comparatively high luminous efficacy and longer lifetime. In addition, the top-emitting inverted P-OLED device architecture performs competitively at the laboratory scale with commercial-scale inorganic LEDs for all metrics. However, if top-emitting P-OLEDs are to be manufactured on a large scale, the luminous efficacy assumed for laboratory-scale devices needs to remain constant throughout development to remain competitive.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1418-1431
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Cleaner Production
Volume137
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 20 2016

Fingerprint

Organic polymers
Organic light emitting diodes (OLED)
polymer
cost
Polymers
energy
Costs
Operating costs
Light emitting diodes
Energy cost
Tin oxides
indium
Indium
Electric power utilization
tin
Lighting
Display devices
Fabrication
Economics
CO2 emissions

Keywords

  • Cost
  • Efficiency
  • Energy
  • Greenhouse gas
  • Life-cycle
  • Polymer OLED

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Strategy and Management
  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Cite this

Cost, energy and emissions assessment of organic polymer light-emitting device architectures. / Carter, Catrice M.; Cho, Justin; Glanzer, Aaron; Kamcev, Nikola; O'Carroll, Deirdre M.

In: Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 137, 20.11.2016, p. 1418-1431.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Carter, Catrice M. ; Cho, Justin ; Glanzer, Aaron ; Kamcev, Nikola ; O'Carroll, Deirdre M. / Cost, energy and emissions assessment of organic polymer light-emitting device architectures. In: Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016 ; Vol. 137. pp. 1418-1431.
@article{66310215c01f4d8ebb35b440980274d8,
title = "Cost, energy and emissions assessment of organic polymer light-emitting device architectures",
abstract = "Proponents for sustainable alternative lighting and display options advocate for organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), particularly polymer-based organic light-emitting diodes (P-OLEDs), because of their potential for low-cost fabrication, more versatile device formats and lower power consumption compared to traditional options. Here, an economic, energy and CO2 emissions assessment is carried out for four different laboratory-scale, blue-emitting P-OLED device architectures: bottom-emitting conventional; bottom-emitting inverted; top-emitting conventional; and top-emitting inverted. Additionally, comparisons with a standard, commercial-scale, blue inorganic light-emitting diode (LED) device architecture are made. The various P-OLED device architectures are investigated due to their potential to increase operational lifetime (inverted) and light out-coupling efficiency (top-emitting). The following metrics are used in this assessment: device cost per area; yearly operating cost; optical power cost; CO2 emissions from device production; and yearly operating CO2 emissions. We show that the top-emitting inverted device architecture significantly reduces the device cost per area, yearly operating cost, optical power cost and CO2 emissions for the P-OLED devices, due to elimination of indium tin oxide and its comparatively high luminous efficacy and longer lifetime. In addition, the top-emitting inverted P-OLED device architecture performs competitively at the laboratory scale with commercial-scale inorganic LEDs for all metrics. However, if top-emitting P-OLEDs are to be manufactured on a large scale, the luminous efficacy assumed for laboratory-scale devices needs to remain constant throughout development to remain competitive.",
keywords = "Cost, Efficiency, Energy, Greenhouse gas, Life-cycle, Polymer OLED",
author = "Carter, {Catrice M.} and Justin Cho and Aaron Glanzer and Nikola Kamcev and O'Carroll, {Deirdre M}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.186",
language = "English",
volume = "137",
pages = "1418--1431",
journal = "Journal of Cleaner Production",
issn = "0959-6526",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost, energy and emissions assessment of organic polymer light-emitting device architectures

AU - Carter, Catrice M.

AU - Cho, Justin

AU - Glanzer, Aaron

AU - Kamcev, Nikola

AU - O'Carroll, Deirdre M

PY - 2016/11/20

Y1 - 2016/11/20

N2 - Proponents for sustainable alternative lighting and display options advocate for organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), particularly polymer-based organic light-emitting diodes (P-OLEDs), because of their potential for low-cost fabrication, more versatile device formats and lower power consumption compared to traditional options. Here, an economic, energy and CO2 emissions assessment is carried out for four different laboratory-scale, blue-emitting P-OLED device architectures: bottom-emitting conventional; bottom-emitting inverted; top-emitting conventional; and top-emitting inverted. Additionally, comparisons with a standard, commercial-scale, blue inorganic light-emitting diode (LED) device architecture are made. The various P-OLED device architectures are investigated due to their potential to increase operational lifetime (inverted) and light out-coupling efficiency (top-emitting). The following metrics are used in this assessment: device cost per area; yearly operating cost; optical power cost; CO2 emissions from device production; and yearly operating CO2 emissions. We show that the top-emitting inverted device architecture significantly reduces the device cost per area, yearly operating cost, optical power cost and CO2 emissions for the P-OLED devices, due to elimination of indium tin oxide and its comparatively high luminous efficacy and longer lifetime. In addition, the top-emitting inverted P-OLED device architecture performs competitively at the laboratory scale with commercial-scale inorganic LEDs for all metrics. However, if top-emitting P-OLEDs are to be manufactured on a large scale, the luminous efficacy assumed for laboratory-scale devices needs to remain constant throughout development to remain competitive.

AB - Proponents for sustainable alternative lighting and display options advocate for organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), particularly polymer-based organic light-emitting diodes (P-OLEDs), because of their potential for low-cost fabrication, more versatile device formats and lower power consumption compared to traditional options. Here, an economic, energy and CO2 emissions assessment is carried out for four different laboratory-scale, blue-emitting P-OLED device architectures: bottom-emitting conventional; bottom-emitting inverted; top-emitting conventional; and top-emitting inverted. Additionally, comparisons with a standard, commercial-scale, blue inorganic light-emitting diode (LED) device architecture are made. The various P-OLED device architectures are investigated due to their potential to increase operational lifetime (inverted) and light out-coupling efficiency (top-emitting). The following metrics are used in this assessment: device cost per area; yearly operating cost; optical power cost; CO2 emissions from device production; and yearly operating CO2 emissions. We show that the top-emitting inverted device architecture significantly reduces the device cost per area, yearly operating cost, optical power cost and CO2 emissions for the P-OLED devices, due to elimination of indium tin oxide and its comparatively high luminous efficacy and longer lifetime. In addition, the top-emitting inverted P-OLED device architecture performs competitively at the laboratory scale with commercial-scale inorganic LEDs for all metrics. However, if top-emitting P-OLEDs are to be manufactured on a large scale, the luminous efficacy assumed for laboratory-scale devices needs to remain constant throughout development to remain competitive.

KW - Cost

KW - Efficiency

KW - Energy

KW - Greenhouse gas

KW - Life-cycle

KW - Polymer OLED

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991066516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991066516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.186

DO - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.186

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84991066516

VL - 137

SP - 1418

EP - 1431

JO - Journal of Cleaner Production

JF - Journal of Cleaner Production

SN - 0959-6526

ER -