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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1418-1431 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Journal of Cleaner Production |
| Volume | 137 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Nov 20 2016 |
Fingerprint
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 journal › Article
}
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
VL - 137
SP - 1418
EP - 1431
JO - Journal of Cleaner Production
JF - Journal of Cleaner Production
SN - 0959-6526
ER -