Good afternoon, everyone, and Welcome to First Solar's Fourth quarter 2021 earnings call. This call is being webcast live on the investor section of First Solar's website at investor.firstsolar.com. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Mitch Ennis from First Solar Investor Relations. Mr. Ennis, you may begin.
Thank you. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us. Today, the company issued a press release announcing its fourth quarter and full year 2021 financial results, as well as its guidance for 2021. A copy of the press release and associated presentation are available on First Solar's website at investor.firstsolar.com. With me today are Mark Widmar, Chief Executive Officer, and Alex Bradley, Chief Financial Officer. Mark will begin by providing a business update. Alex will then discuss our financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2021. Following these remarks, Mark will provide a business and strategy outlook. Alex will then discuss our financial guidance for 2022. Following the remarks, we open the call for questions.
Please note this call will include forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from management's current expectations, including, among other risks and uncertainties, the severity and duration of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We encourage you to review the safe harbor statements contained in today's press release and presentation for a more complete description. It is now my pleasure to introduce Mark Widmar, Chief Executive Officer. Mark?
Thank you, Mitch. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us today. I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to the entire First Solar team for their hard work and perseverance in a year where much of the solar PV manufacturing industry faced supply chain, logistics, cost, and pandemic-related challenges. Despite these dynamics, we have continued to scale our manufacturing capacity and adapt our business model in a constantly evolving market. Through our points of differentiation, which include our CdTe thin film module technology, a vertically integrated continuous manufacturing process, a strong balance sheet, and a commitment to the principles of responsible solar, we have created a growth-oriented business model which we believe positions us to be successful over the long term.
While Alex will provide a more comprehensive overview of our 2021 financial results, I would like to highlight that our full year EPS results of $4.38 per diluted share came in above the midpoint of our guidance range we provided at this time during our third quarter earnings call. Of note, this EPS result, despite an unprecedented challenging trade environment, is also solidly within the original guidance range we provided last February. Beginning on slide 3, I will highlight some of our key 2021 accomplishments which we believe positions us for sustainable growth. To begin, we had an excellent year from a commercial perspective, securing a record 17.5 GW of net bookings in 2021, more than double our prior annual record.
This momentum has carried into 2022 with 4.8 GW of net bookings year to date, which brings our total since the previous earnings call to 11.8 GW. As we secure this very significant volume for delivery into the future, we have been employing a contracting strategy which enables our customers to benefit from the evolution of our product and technology platform, while also partially de-risking our position around sales rate. I will discuss this approach later in the call. We produced 7.9 GW in 2021, delivering against our near-term commitments despite pandemic-related challenges. Moreover, we reduced our cost per watt produced by 6% between the end of 2020 and 2021, despite inflationary pressures, rising commodity costs, and as a result of the COVID-19, the inability to implement as planned several module cost reduction programs.
Expansion has been an important theme in 2021 as we set the foundation to reach approximately 16 GW of capacity in 2024. We added our sixth Series 6 factory, our second factory in Malaysia, in early 2021 and announced plans for new factories to produce our next generation of solar panels, which we are calling Series 7, in India and Ohio. As a reminder, the two Series 7 factories are expected to come online in 2023 and combined with their benefit of locating supply near to demand, reducing the cost of sales rate, are expected to increase gross profit per watt at approximately $0.01-$0.03 relative to our existing Series 6 fleet.
On the technology front, we increased our top Series 6 production bin to 465 W, which represents a 20 W increase year-over-year and is in line with our guidance provided last February. We reduced our 30-year warranted power output degradation rate from 0.5% to 0.3% per year. This meaningful improvement can result in the module yielding up to 4.4% more energy on a life cycle basis. We completed the sale of our U.S. project development and North American O&M businesses. In summary, each of these achievements are the result of our intent to focus on our greatest competitive advantage, which includes our differentiated technology and manufacturing process. Turning to slide 4, I'll next discuss our most recent shipments and bookings in greater detail.
We shipped approximately 2.1 GW and 7.7 GW for the fourth quarter and full year 2021 respectively. Which was within, but towards the lower end of our guidance range that we provided during the Q3 earnings call. As a reminder, we generally define shipments as when a delivery process to a customer commences and the module leaves one of our facilities. Whereas revenue recognition or volume sold occurs as transfer of control of the modules to the customer, which is commonly upon the arrival at the destination port of the project site. Note, extended transit times and container availability constraints contributed to our full year 2021 shipments being towards the lower end of our guidance range. The global freight market continues to experience record levels of scheduled delays and reliability issues, which has worsened since the previous earnings call.
Due to these challenges, we entered the year with 1.2 GW of inventory on hand and 675 MW of shipments in transit, not recognized as revenue. While the volume in transit declined quarter-over-quarter, it was meaningfully above the trailing 4-quarter average. Several logistic challenges trended unfavorably in Q4. Firstly, total transit times for transoceanic freight increased by a matter of weeks between Q3 and Q4, reaching levels nearly double historic norms. Secondly, congestion continues to be challenging at U.S. ports, which are further exacerbated in advance of the holiday season. Thirdly, reliability was a significant issue as 3 in 10 planned sailings were canceled around the turn of the year. Finally, over-the-road trucking is constrained from a capacity perspective with load-to-truck ratios at the highest level in several years.
In summary, we are experiencing a two-front impact related to freight in terms of both higher cost and worse carrier performance. With regard to bookings, momentum has accelerated with 11.8 GW of net bookings since the November earnings call. We continue to see an increase in multi-year module sale agreements driven by our customers' need for certainty in terms of the technology they're investing in and their suppliers' integrity and ethics. Representative of this, we have executed an agreement with our highly valued long-term partner, SB Energy, to supply 1.5 GW of deployment in projects in 2023, 2024 and 2025. After accounting for shipments of approximately 2.1 GW during the fourth quarter, our future expected shipments, which extended into 2025, are 26.2 GW.
Including our year-to-date bookings, we are sold out for 2022 and have 10.7 GW, 3.4 GW, and 2.4 GW for planned deliveries in 2023, 2024, and 2025 respectively. Next, I would like to provide an update on our project development and O&M platform in Japan. Today, our remaining offerings outside of our core module business includes project development in Japan, O&M outside of North America, and our continued ownership of certain power generating assets. Of these remaining businesses, our Japan platform is the most prominent in terms of prospective scale and profitability. In late 2021, we received an unsolicited offer to acquire our Japan project development and O&M platform. We believe the potential purchaser strategy to scale a leading solar platform in Japan, coupled with the participation in complementary asset classes, could unlock the full potential of our Japan platform.
Accordingly, we are in advanced stage negotiations to sell our Japan project development and O&M platform. While there is no certainty that we will execute a definitive agreement with this counterparty, we believe that the contemplated transaction value is compelling. Note, if we do not complete this transaction, we expect to either continue our approach of selling down our contracted projects over time or consider an alternative buyer for the platform. I'll turn the call over to Alex, who will discuss our Q4 and full year 2021 results. Alex.
Thanks, Mark. Before discussing our financial results for the quarter and full year 2021, I'll first provide an update on our segment reporting. With the potential sale of our Japan project development and O&M platform, the revenue and margin opportunities outside of our core modules business lie largely with a relatively small pool of existing O&M contracts outside of Japan and North America, power generating assets for projects that we previously developed, and any legacy obligations as a result of our prior systems activities. Accordingly, we've changed our reportable segments to align with our internal reporting structure and long-term strategic plans. Going forward, our module business will represent our only reportable segment. For comparative purposes, the prospective module segment is fully comparable to prior periods. Any revenue or margin associated with activities that were historically categorized as our systems business are now presented as other in our segment reporting.
Starting on slide five, I'll cover the income statement highlights for the fourth quarter and full year 2021, which are presented in this manner. Net sales in the fourth quarter were $907 million, an increase of $324 million compared to the prior quarter. This was primarily a result of the sale of three projects in Japan and increased module volume sold in Q4. For the full year 2021, net sales were $2.9 billion compared to $3.7 billion in 2020. Relative to our guidance expectations, net sales were within but towards the lower end of our guidance range due to delays in module sales, revenue recognition as a result of the aforementioned freight and logistics challenges. Gross margin was 27% in the fourth quarter compared to 21% in the third quarter.
For the full year 2021, gross margin was 25%, which is unchanged from the prior year. Our 2021 guidance had assumed the completion of two project sales in Japan. As a result of completing three project sales in Q4, our Q4 gross profit for our residual business operations was $102 million, approximately $25 million above the high end of our guidance range for Q4 and full year 2021. Module segment gross margin was 21% in the fourth quarter, which is unchanged from the prior quarter. Full year 2021, our module segment gross profit came in below the low end of our guidance range by approximately $12 million. Additionally, full year 2021 module segment gross margin of 20% was down 5 percentage points from 25% in 2020. This was a result of several items.
Firstly, sales freight continued to adversely impact our financial results, reducing gross margin by 6 percentage points in 2020, 11 percentage points in full year 2021, and 13 percentage points in Q4 of 2021. Note, as a reminder, many of our module peers report freight costs as a separate operating expense. For comparison purposes, we encourage you to consider this factor when benchmarking our module gross margin % relative to our peers. Secondly, 2021 volume sold was below our full year expectations due to the aforementioned ocean freight reliability issues, port congestion, and over-the-road trucking capacity constraints. The year-end 2021 modules in transit number of 675 MW remains above historic norms.
Thirdly, factory upgrades in 2021 resulted in higher downtime and underutilization and lower production, with full year 2021 ramp and underutilization-related expenses of $19 million, or 1% point of gross margin. Finally, while we reduced our cost per watt produced by 6% between the end of 2020 and 2021, we faced a cost per watt produced headwind in 2021 as a result of higher inbound freight and aluminum costs. In light of these circumstances, although the module segment gross profit and gross margin came in below our 2021 expectations, we are pleased with how we navigated the current environment and delivered solid module segment performance. SG&A, R&D, and production startup expenses totaled $73 million in the fourth quarter, an increase of approximately $1 million relative to the third quarter.
This increase was primarily driven by a $1 million increase in production startup expense from the addition of our third factory in Ohio, and a $4 million increase in R&D expense predominantly related to CuRe testing, which were partially offset by an impairment charge related to a certain development project that occurred in the prior period. SG&A, R&D, and production startup expenses totaled $290 million in 2021 compared to $357 million in 2020. Overall, we're pleased with our operating expense results at $290 million, which was within our full year guidance range, $285 million-$300 million, and represents a significant year-over-year reduction. Operating income was $173 million in Q4 and $587 million for the full year 2021.
Income tax expense was $103 million for the full year 2021. Fourth quarter earnings per share was $1.23 compared to $0.22 in the prior quarter. For full year 2021, earnings per share was $4.38 compared to $3.73 in 2020. Our 2021 EPS result came in above the midpoint of the guidance range we provided on the first quarter earnings call, and is also within the original range we provided last February. While there were several unexpected challenges and benefits we faced last year, our overall performance reflects the strength of our business model and ability to navigate a challenging environment over the course of the year.
Turning to slide 6, our cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, and marketable securities balance at year-end was $1.8 billion, a decrease of $109 million from the prior quarter. Our year-end net cash position, which includes cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, marketable securities, less debt, was $1.6 billion, a decrease of $71 million from prior quarter. Our net cash balance was higher than our guidance range due to lower than expected project spend on Japanese development projects and the timing of cash payments for capital expenditures that were delayed to 2022. Cash flow from operations was $238 million in 2021 compared to $37 million in 2020. Capital expenditures were $195 million in the fourth quarter compared to $165 million in the third quarter. CapEx was $540 million in 2021 compared to $417 million in 2020. With that, I'll turn the call back to Mark to provide a business and financial update.
Thank you, Alex. Turning to slide 7. I would like to begin by providing an update on our CuRe program. Over five years ago, we announced the acceleration of our Series 6 transition, which transformed our manufacturing process and significantly increased our module wattage. While the outcome of the Series 6 program has been a great success, as reflected by our record 22 GW backlog as of the end of 2021, it is easy to lose sight of the initial challenges we face when scaling high volume manufacturing with respect to module wattage, input, and manufacturing yield. Through persistence, resilience, and ingenuity, our manufacturing associates methodically resolved these challenges, enabling Series 6 to be the success it is today. Looking forward, CuRe represents an anticipated enhancement to our module performance, which is expected to increase efficiency and lifecycle energy.
On the November earnings call, we indicated that we had demonstrated CuRe's full performance entitlement in a lab setting, and are working to realize the entitlement in high volume manufacturing conditions. As a result, we have revised our integration schedule to lead line implementation by the end of Q1 2022, with fleet-wide replication timing to be determined upon completion of the lead line. Since the previous earnings call, we have conducted a series of CuRe runs on high volume production lines in Ohio. While the trends are for improving module wattage and degradation appear favorable, we are still working to realize the full performance entitlement in high volume manufacturing conditions. Over the coming weeks, we intend to conduct further testing, which we believe will inform our views on lead line implementation timing. Again, this lead line implementation timing will in turn inform fleet-wide replication timing.
As highlighted on our Q2 2021 earnings call, our technology team continues to create new optionality in our technology roadmap. This optionality enables us to partially mitigate the effects of CuRe delays through the enhancement of our current Series 6 technology, with our top production bin reaching 465 W at our Ohio and Malaysia factories. In addition to this improved efficiency in module wattage, Series 6 now has a significantly improved long-term degradation rate. Using the improvement metrology to measure degradation at our test sites and further validated by third-party analytic methods and customer site data, the current Series 6 platform now has a 30-year warranted power output degradation rate of 0.3% per year, which is 40% below our previous warranted and represents a potential 4.4 increase in life cycle energy.
While the improved Series 6 nameplate wattage allows us to achieve our target at exiting 2021 with a top production bin of 460 W-465 W, the expected overall lifetime energy performance of the current Series 6 program remains under that of CuRe, primarily due to the differences in warranted degradation rate and temperature coefficient. That said, looking into 2022, we believe there is a path for our Series 6 module to increase the top production bin to 470 W with an upside potential of 475 W exiting the year. Furthermore, we are also working on our Series 6 modules produced under the current program to achieve a temperature coefficient similar to what is expected under our CuRe program. I'll discuss additional optionality on our technology roadmap, including bifaciality and the opportunities to drive to higher levels of efficiency later in the call.
While CuRe implementation has been delayed, the significant improvements in efficiency and degradation of Series Six has been beneficial to more closely meet our customers' expectations. In connection with our CuRe obligations this year, as discussed on the November earnings call, we have either amended or are in an advanced stage of negotiation to amend certain customer contracts utilizing CuRe technology by substituting our enhanced Series Six product. We expect these amendments to impact 2022 revenue and gross margin by approximately $60 million, which is reflected in our guidance. Note, we are still working to finalize certain CuRe-related contract amendments. Relative to our contracted backlog disclosure, approximately 40% of the $60 million is in our contracted backlog disclosure as of December 31, 2021. The balance will be reflected once the remaining contract amendments are completed.
These amendments, coupled with the existing and forecasted improvements to our current Series 6 program related to efficiency, module wattage, degradation rate, and temperature coefficient, as well as other potential enhancements under our technology roadmap, which I will discuss momentarily, have reduced the requirements to implement our CuRe program by a particular deadline. Looking into 2022, we are pleased to enter the year with a record backlog and our growth plan well underway with capacity expansions in the U.S. and India. However, 2022 is expected to be a challenging year from an earnings standpoint, both due to external factors and the near-term impact of factory startup costs associated with our growth plans. The most significant driver impacting the year is the freight market. Ocean freight costs for contracted volumes have risen 200%-300% from pre-pandemic levels.
With our recently concluded carrier negotiations, we expect our 2022 contracted freight rates to increase by more than 100% year-over-year. This compares to a pre-pandemic historic annual % increase in the mid- to upper single digits. At the same time, transit times have significantly increased and reliability and availability have significantly worsened, pushing more volume into a higher priced spot market. Despite record profitability across the shipping industry, this situation currently shows no sign of improving in 2022. We increasingly are monitoring the growing calls for accountability, in particular from Georgia Senator Warnock, who has demanded an investigation into the apparent price gouging of ocean carriers. We expect sales freight for 2022 to increase to approximately $0.05 a watt. This is a combination of contracting and premium rates.
Year on year, we expect a better mix of contract to premium rates, but with a substantial increase in contract rates, we expect sales freight costs to increase by approximately $200 million-$240 million year on year. Note, our anticipated 2022 shipments were largely booked prior to the shocking increase in freight rates. Relative to our expectations at the time of the negotiation, the module ASP freight rates have more than doubled. Externally, there have been a number of events that have adversely impacted our module cost reduction roadmap. Firstly, the aforementioned freight market disruption has resulted in higher shipment costs for inbound raw materials. Secondly, the increase in inflation in commodities has both directly and indirectly affected our filler materials and cost of production.
The cost of aluminum, which has increased over 40% between the start and end of 2021, has been a strong headwind against our module cost. We have partially offset this headwind by implementing our Series 6 Plus at our Malaysia and U.S. factories, which reduced the aluminum content of our frames by 10%. Thirdly, COVID-19 constraints, including travel quarantine restrictions for both First Solar associates and third-party equipment sellers, have impacted the timing of our Series 6 Plus and throughput upgrades in Vietnam. While we expect to see a loosening of travel restrictions this year, this uncertainty presents ongoing risks to the timing of upgrades of our last factory in Vietnam to Series 6 Plus, which is expected to be completed in early Q2. COVID-related constraints have also delayed the fleet rollout of our glass optimization program.
As mentioned previously, our 2021 cost per watt declined by 6% versus our target of 11%. The shortfall reflective of the items noted above resulted in us missing our cost per watt target reduction by approximately $0.01 per watt. While we expect to continue to improve our cost per watt in 2022, we will not be able to offset a number of the headwinds experienced in 2021, and therefore, our module cost will be higher than our roadmap by approximately $0.01 per watt. This is expected to negatively impact 2022 gross margin by approximately $100 million. While there are better sources for expert perspectives on the most recent activities in Ukraine and Russia and the resulting implications on geopolitics, from our perspective, we are watching closely the tragic events unfold.
As of today, our supply chain has not been impacted by the crisis, and we have no current tier one suppliers in the conflict area. It is reasonable to anticipate natural volatility in various supply markets, such as metal or fuel, should the conflict continue to escalate. We will continue to monitor the situation daily. Internally, the CuRe implementation delays and the expected module wattage improvements will adversely impact our expected cost per watt reductions. Finally, capacity growth decisions made in 2021 will provide long-term benefits in 2023 and beyond, but provide a headwind to the 2022 P&L start due to start-up expenses of $85 million-$90 million. We will continue to navigate these headwinds with a focus on the future.
As we invest in realizing the full value of our differentiated thin-film technology, this pivotal year will evolve around continuing significant investments in R&D, new products, manufacturing expansion, and employing new contracting strategies, all of which we believe will set the stage for sustained growth in 2023 and beyond. As it relates to R&D, our team has been cultivating optionality in our roadmap across energy attributes, including efficiency, degradation, temperature coefficient, and bifaciality, along with product attributes including Series 7. More specifically, on the Q2 2021 earnings call, we highlighted that we are deploying prototypes of early-stage bifacial CdTe modules at our test facility, and we're pleased with the initial results. Since then, we have continued to run performance tests on both our current and CuRe device platforms and have gathered more field data with the results implying the potential for an increase in specific energy yield.
Adding bifaciality on CdTe adds to the well-understood and valued temperature coefficient, spectral response, and partial shading, and long-term degradation energy advantages. With a mid-term target of a 490-watt bifacial module, we are working diligently to commercialize this technology across our future platforms. We believe the commercial and financial prospects of bifacial CdTe are compelling due to the anticipated higher energy yield with limited CapEx or retooling required in order to integrate a transparent back contact across the fleet. Turning to slide 8, as it relates to expansion, construction of our Series 7 factories is underway, and the schedules are on track with the U.S. factory expected to commence initial production in the first half of 2023 and the India factory by the end of 2023.
Once scaled, these factories are expected to lead the fleet in terms of module wattage, efficiency, and cost per watt. With a midterm goal of 570 W Monofacial Series 7 module, we see the potential for meaningful improvement in our module performance. As we significantly increase our nameplate capacity, we believe this anticipated growth, when balanced with liquidity and profitability, will drive contribution margin expansion given our operating expense cost structure is 80%-90% fixed. As a reflection of this expansion roadmap and continued optimization of the existing Series 6 fleet, we have summarized our expected exit nameplate capacity and production for 2022, 2023, and 2024 on slide 9. As it relates to our contracting strategy, a feature of our newer framework agreements is the customers entering into a contract today can benefit from the potential realization of our technology roadmap.
For approximately 7.3 GW of bookings secured prior to the end of the calendar year, we have structured the ASP and product expectations on a baseline wattage and energy performance roadmap without the full anticipated benefits of our technology roadmap. To the extent we realize future module technology improvements, including new product design and energy enhancements beyond what is specified in the baseline agreement, the incremental value is expected to result in a corresponding increase to ASP.
Our ability to contract in this manner provides our customers with clarity of pricing, product availability, and delivery timing, enabling them to underwrite PPAs from a position of strength with lower risk to their expected project return. From our perspective, there is also strategic rationale to contract in this manner, as it provides us confidence in our ability to sell through our expected supply and provides us visibility into an expected profit per watt, with the potential for meaningful upside to the extent we realize these anticipated technology improvements. This framework allows us to understand the price certainty, the value of our investments across different product enhancements.
Based on these potential technology improvements, the approximately 7.3 GW of contracted module volumes as of December 31, 2021, such adjustments, if realized, could result in additional revenue of up to $0.2 billion, the majority of which would be recognized in 2023. Note, this contracting approach has been incorporated in our 2022 bookings year to date. From a sales rate contracting perspective, last year, we began employing module contract structures which mitigate our exposure to sales rate. As we continue to secure bookings 2-4 years into the future, these arrangements provide a balanced risk profile for us and our customers, where we are incentivized to minimize sales rate costs, but generally provide a cap above which customers are obligated to pay. We started employing these structures in Q2 2021, and approximately one-third of our expected 2022 volume includes these provisions.
In 2023 and beyond, we anticipate a significant majority of volume will include these types of provisions. Across our contracted backlog, these contracts provide greater clarity into an expected gross profit per watt by providing freight relief through a higher ASP if rates remain above pre-pandemic levels. In addition to our contracting approach, our expansion strategy, including our third Ohio plant and our new India plant, are expected to further de-risk our exposure to transoceanic freight costs by bringing manufacturing closer to demand. As these factories scale, our production mix exposed to transoceanic freight risk is expected to decrease by approximately 30 percentage points between 2022 and 2024.
Overall, from a pricing perspective, the strong demand we are witnessing for our differentiated CdTe module has enabled us to secure 10.7 GW of bookings for planned deliveries in 2023 at a baseline ASP that is only $0.003 cents below our planned deliveries in 2022. It is important to note the ASP is essentially composed of two components, the module plus sales rate. The baseline ASP generally assumes sales rate will be approximately $0.025 cents per watt. To the extent that the actual sales rate is above the baseline, the ASP will increase to cover most of, if not all of, the incremental sales rate. When including this variable pricing adjustment and assuming 2022 sales rate environment, we expect our 2023 sales rate adjusted ASP to be approximately $0.01 cent higher than 2022 on a like basis.
In addition, as we secure the significant volume for delivery in 2023, we have been employing a contracting strategy which enables our customers to benefit from the evolution of our technology and product platform. Realizing the entirety of the benefit of this platform would increase our baseline 2023 ASP by up to $0.02/W. Turning to slide 10. We continue to see active customer engagement and high levels of interest in both individual projects as well as the multi-year and multi-gigawatt agreements across key markets in the United States and India. Our total bookings opportunities of 53.6 GW remain very robust, with 27.7 GW in the mid- to late-stage customer engagement. This opportunity set, coupled with our contracted backlog, gives us confidence as we continue scaling our manufacturing capacity. Incrementally, we continue to evaluate the potential for future capacity expansion.
As referenced on the Q3 earnings call, we have started to engage with certain suppliers to ensure we have line of sight on critical path tools for further expansion. We believe strong demand for our CdTe modules, a dynamic technology roadmap, a strong balance sheet, and largely fixed operating expense cost structure are each catalysts as we evaluate expansion. While this potential expansion may be in the U.S., India or beyond, we are seeking clarity on domestic solar policies to ensure such expansion is well-positioned. Note, we have made no such decision at this time, and any capacity expansion are unlikely to contribute to our 2023 production plan. I'll now turn the call back over to Alex, who will discuss the financial outlook and provide 2022 guidance.
Thanks, Mark. Before discussing 2022 financial guidance, I'll provide an update on our cost roadmap. As initially presented on our February 2021 guidance call, we forecasted a year-end 2020 to year-end 2021 cost per watt produced reduction of 11%. In November, we revised our reduction assumption to 5% based on increases in inbound freight, cover glass, aluminum and adhesive costs. Our final year-over-year reduction came in at 6%. Note the 5% difference between our original assumption and our year-end result remains a headwind in 2022 and is expected to impact full-year 2022 cost per watt by approximately $0.01. On a cost-per-watt sold basis, our original year-over-year forecast reduction of 8% was revised to 3% in November, and in our final full-year results, cost per watt sold remained flat year-over-year.
This was despite a year-over-year increase in sales rate per watt of 70%. Excluding the effect of sales rate, our cost per watt sold declined by approximately 8% for the same period. Looking into 2022, from a glass perspective, we've largely stabilized this cost through long-term predominantly fixed price agreements with domestic suppliers that have economic benefits as we achieve high levels of production. On the Q3 2021 earnings call, we highlighted that COVID related delays impacted the startup timing of a new glass facility to support our Malaysia and Vietnam sites. In addition to competitive pricing, this facility is expected to reduce the cost of inbound freight for our international sites. Given recent improvements in the COVID situation in Southeast Asia, we anticipate this new facility will commence production and begin benefiting cost per watt in the first half of this year.
The rate to aluminum, we anticipate framing costs will be elevated relative to historical norms. We highlighted during our Q3 earnings call that we had a commodity swap contract in place, which covered the majority of our U.S. consumption in 2021. Note, many of our aluminum contracts which supply our Malaysia and Vietnam factories reference aluminum trade on the Shanghai Futures Exchange, which makes hedging a challenge given foreign investors cannot access the market without a registered local entity in China. While aluminum pricing remains above pre-pandemic levels, going forward, and for both our domestic and international sites, we have several strategies in process to reduce framing costs in the near- to mid-term. Firstly, by differentiating the frame design and reducing costs for modules installed in certain geographies and parts of the array that are exposed to standard versus high mechanical loads.
Secondly, by optimizing the mounting interface for our Series 7 module. Finally, by evaluating alternative materials for the construction of our frame, including a steel back rail for our Series 7 modules in Ohio and India. As it relates to logistics, outbound sales freight is expected to be approximately $0.05 per watt in 2022. For context, prior to recent dislocation in the global freight market, sales freight per watt was generally between $0.02 and $0.025 per watt in 2020. Note the aforementioned sales freight contract provisions are expected to provide approximately $0.005 per watt relief on a fleet-wide basis in 2022, which is reflected in our guidance. On a fleet-wide basis, relative to where we entered 2021, we anticipate reducing our cost per watt produced by 4%-6% by the end of 2022.
Despite an expected 25%-40% increase in sales freight per watt, we anticipate our cost per watt sold will be flat between the end of 2021 and 2022, respectively. Excluding the effects of sales freight, we anticipate our cost per watt sold will decline by approximately 5%-8% over the same period. Note the expected 25%-40% increase in sales freight per watt in 2022 is expected to be partially offset by contract provisions for sales freight recovery, which cover approximately one-third of our shipments in the year. By 2023, similar sales freight recovery provisions are expected to cover a significant majority of our shipments. Turning to slide 11, looking forward, despite near-term inflationary pressure around certain commodity and logistics costs, we believe our revised midterm roadmap will enable us to continue reducing our Series 6 cost per watt.
Starting with efficiency, our midterm goal is a 490-watt bifacial and 500-watt Monofacial model. As a reminder, improvements in module wattage generally provide a benefit to each component of cost per watt, including our variable, fixed, and sales freight cost. Secondly, we're tracking to increase throughput by 9%-11% in the midterm on our existing manufacturing base, resulting in a fixed cost solution benefit. Thirdly, we continue to see a path to increase our Series 6 manufacturing yield to 98.5% in the midterm. Fourthly, we see opportunities to reduce our bill of material costs by 10% midterm, primarily across framing and glass. Finally, we believe the combination of thinning our module profile, transport optimization, and employing risk-sharing mechanisms in our customer contracting could lead to a 40%-50% reduction in net sales freight costs.
Note, this expected reduction includes a combination of cost recapture through the aforementioned sales freight customer contracting strategy and increased modules per shipping container. Separately, as it relates to Series 7, we anticipate both our India and Ohio factories may have a cost per watt once fully ramped lower than our current lowest cost factories in Vietnam. Combined with the benefit of locating supply near to demand and reducing the cost of sales freight, Series 7 is expected to reduce cost per watt and net sales freight costs in total by approximately $0.01-$0.02 relative to Series 6. With that context in mind, I'll discuss the assumptions included in our 2022 financial guidance. Turn to slide 12. Starting with legacy systems items, we're pleased with the potential value and long-term benefits of selling our Japan development and O&M platforms.
While there's been no assurance that we will enter into an agreement for a transaction, our guidance assumes a gain of approximately $270 million-$290 million, which would be recognized as a gain on sale of businesses, which lies between gross margin and operating income on the P&L. As we previously assumed, ongoing asset sales from the development portfolio, which benefit gross margin. This change in assumption is a headwind to gross margin in 2022. Furthermore, until any sale is closed, overhead costs associated with the Japan platform will also continue on impacting operating expenses. In addition, we signed an agreement to sell our remaining international O&M contracts outside Japan.
Upon closing, which is expected in the first half of 2022, we expect to recognize a pre-tax gain on sale shown in the income statement between gross margin and operating income of approximately $10 million. As it relates to power generating assets, we're evaluating whether to continue holding our Luz del Norte asset in Chile or whether to pursue a sale of this project. The pursuit of such a sale would require coordination with the project's lenders, and as previously discussed in our November earnings call, could result in an impairment charge in the future if we are unable to recover our net carrying value in the project. No impact from any possible sale of this project is included in our guidance for 2022.
2022 shipments are expected to be between 8.9 and 9.4 GW, which exceeds our production plan for the year of 8.2-8.8 GW due to higher than expected inventory levels at year-end 2021. Our factory expansion and factory upgrade roadmaps are expected to impact operating income by approximately $95-$105 million. This comprises startup expenses of $85-$90 million, primarily in current and new factories in Ohio and India. As previously mentioned, we're planning to implement Series 6 Plus upgrades in Vietnam and other upgrades in 2022. These upgrades will require downtime, resulting in estimated underutilization losses of $10-$15 million. We anticipate these improvements will contribute meaningfully to our 2023 production plan.
Our liquidity position has been a strategic differentiator in an industry that's historically prioritized growth without regard to long-term capital structure. For example, we're one of the few solar companies that both entered and exited the last decade. Our strong balance sheets enable us to weather periods of volatility and also pursue growth opportunities. Additionally, we were able to self-fund our Series 6 transition while maintaining our strong liquidity position, ending 2021 with $1.6 billion of net cash. Based on our existing liquidity position, coupled with expecting operating cash flows from our existing Series 6 factories, we believe we can self-finance our expansion roadmap. However, based on the opportunity to secure competitive terms and the strategic benefits of a partner when entering into new market, we may raise debt financing to support the construction of our new factory in India.
I'll now cover 2022 guidance ranges on slide 13. Our net sales guidance is between $2.4 billion-$2.6 billion, which is predominantly module segment revenue. Gross margin is expected to be between $155 million-$215 million, which includes $165 million-$225 million of module segment gross margin and -$10 million impact from other legacy activities. Module segment gross margin includes underutilization losses of $10 million-$15 million. As discussed, we anticipate sales freight will be a significant headwind in 2022, and we anticipate sales freight will reduce our module segment gross margin by 18-20 percentage points for the full year 2022.
SG&A expense is expected to total $170 million-$175 million, compared to $170 million in 2021 and $223 million in 2020. As indicated on the guidance call last February, we anticipated the sale of our U.S. project development business to result in annualized savings of approximately $45 million-$50 million, of which approximately 60% sits in the operating expense line. We tracked well relative to this cost reduction plan and are pleased with the expected savings on a go-forward basis. R&D expense is expected to total $110 million-$115 million, compared to $99 million and $94 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively. As we continue to grow our manufacturing capacity, we also intend to add additional headcount for our R&D team to further invest in advanced research initiatives.
SG&A and R&D expense combined is expected to total $280-$290 million, and total operating expenses, including $85-$90 million of production startup expense, are expected to be between $365 million and $380 million. Operating income is expected to be between $55 million and $150 million, and is inclusive of an expected approximately $280-$300 million gain on sale related to the aforementioned Japan project development and international O&M transactions, and $95-$105 million of combined underutilization costs and plant startup expenses. Turning to non-operating items, we expect interest income, interest expense, and other income to net to negative $20-$30 million, which is predominantly driven by FX and interest expense related to Japanese project debt.
Full-year tax expense is forecast to be $35 million-$55 million. This results in full-year 2022 earnings per diluted share guidance range of $0-$0.60. Note from an earnings cadence perspective, we anticipate our earnings profile will improve gradually over the course of the year, with a significant impact in the quarter in which any sale of the Japan development platform were to close. Capital expenditures in 2022 are expected to range from $850 million-$1.1 billion as we advance the construction of our Ohio and India plants, implement upgrades to the fleet, and invest in other R&D related programs. Our year-end 2022 net cash balance is anticipated to be between $1.1 billion and $1.35 billion.
The decrease from our 2021 year-end net cash balance is primarily due to capital expenditures associated with the building of Ohio and India manufacturing plants, which we expect will be partially offset by financing proceeds. Turning to slide 14, I'll summarize the key messages from today's call. Demand has been robust, with 11.8 GW of net bookings since the previous earnings call. Our opportunity pipeline continues to grow, with a global opportunity set of 53.6 GW , including mid- to late-stage opportunities of 27.7 GW. On the supply side, we continue to expand our manufacturing capacity and expect to exit 2024 with approximately 16 GW of capacity. We see significant midterm opportunity for improvements on module efficiency, cost, and energy metrics.
We ended 2021 with fully EPS of $4.38, and are forecasting full year 2022 earnings per share of $0-$0.60. With that, we conclude our prepared remarks and open the call for questions. Operator?
[Thank you. Ladies and gentleman, if you have a question at this time please press the star then the number one key on your touch-tone telephone. If your questions have been answered or you'll not share, move your hands from the telephone key.] Our first question is from Philip Shen with ROTH Capital Partners.
Hi, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. First one is on pricing. As you think through your pricing for 2022 and 2023 with the backdrop of the contract and strategy and the recent bookings, do you think the blended pricing in 2022 could be possibly $0.30 or higher? Or do you expect both 2022 and 2023 to be in the high $0.20 cents per watt? Also was wondering if you could speak to what the expected margins might be for 2023, especially as you drive some costs down in 2023, maybe some of the headwinds abate a touch, and and then your pricing can stay relatively flattish. Then finally, talked about new products in your OpEx investment. Through some pro work, it seems like you might be exploring some DG and RESI solar opportunities.
Was wondering if you might be able to talk through whether or not you see some concrete opportunities there. You know, could that be a new product for you as you roll out the new plant in Ohio? If so, you know, what kind of volume could that be? You know, it is a nice market with healthy ASPs. Any color there would be very helpful. Thanks.
All right. Philip, I guess on the pricing, there's a little bit of potential pricing upside in 2022, but not overly significant. You know, to the extent that there are about 30% of the volume we have in 2022 has some sales trade adjustments of which will appropriately take, you know, comply with the obligations under the contract, and therefore adjust if the cost is above the cap of which we agreed to. That could impact it. You know, if we are able to, for example, improve the temperature coefficient on our current product, then there's potentially some opportunity that could be monetized in 2022.
There's not a significant increase in ASP opportunities off of what you see. I think the contracted backlog that will show up in the K, that's gonna be somewhere right around $0.27 cents or something like that. That relates to the 22 GW or so that we do have contracted. As you go into 2023, I'll take that. Look, what I said in the call is that, you know, essentially the ASPs are relatively flat. I think we're down about three tenths of a cent or something like that, 2023 relative to 2022. There's about $0.03 cents of adjustment. There's a penny or a little bit north of a penny on the sales rate. I wanna make sure that's understood.
Again, our pricing includes not only the module, but the delivery of the module. If you think about what our pricing or net pricing is today, just for the module, you take cost $0.27 or so, which is in the 10-K as the average, and you pull $0.05 out of that. That effectively says that our net module pricing is about $0.22. If you do that same analysis for the revised contracting structure that we have, you would take the $0.27 and back off about $0.025. You're gonna see an increase of ASP just from that structure. There's a potential of $0.025 of higher ASP monetization in 2023 than we have in 2022 because of how we structured the contracts.
Only about 70% or so of the contracts in 2023 have that structure. All of the bookings that we've done, you know, the whole 12 GW that we just referenced, as an example, have a modification formula effectively embedded in them, or a customer may accept export type of pricing, therefore, we don't take the freight risk, and they're responsible for it, as an example. There's opportunities. If you take the $0.27, and if you include the sales rate, and if you include, you know, the price adjusters for the technology, which could be bifaciality, which could be tempco, could be higher bid and so on, that you could see significant increases in 2023 over 2022. You can do the math, you can sort of make your own assumptions.
Does it get into the 30s or not? You know, there's the potential you can start pushing upwards of that. Again, depending on how we structured the risk profile on the sales rate, you can see individual opportunities that we'll have 3 handles on them for various reasons in how we structure and how we contract it. As it relates to expected margin, I can't give you the absolute numbers on that, but what I can say is that, you know, there's a upward opportunity in ASPs based on what I referenced. Alex indicated that we'll continue. We just took 6% of cost per watt down in 2021 over 2020. Then there's other, you know, single-digit type of opportunity of re-reducing 2022 over 2021.
If you just do your math, carry it forward, you can see that there is still a trajectory even in the environment that we're dealing with right now that is very challenging. There's a trajectory that can still drive to a lower cost per watt. You can do the margin around in terms of what the expected margin is by doing the math and, you know, how we described it during the call based upon the ASP as well as the cost side. On the comment about DG. Look, we've been saying, you know, for a while now that we are looking at tandem structures and high efficiency modules that could drive an opportunity to expand, say, our traditional utility scale segment of the market at which we currently serve.
As we think through that roadmap and that product evolution, then clearly it does open, you know, a DG RESI type of opportunity that could, you know, enable an entitlement of higher ASPs. But Phil, as you know, I mean, we're on a path to get 16 GW. I mean, if we're doing, let's say 500 MW, you know, maybe even 1 GW, yes, it's a great market. We wanna participate. We've got some great partners. We've had some conversations in that regard, but still gonna be, you know, relatively small percentage of the overall business.
Phil, just one thing to add on the 2022-2023 on top of the ASP and cost point indications of the market, is that when you get into 2023, we're gonna have call it 1-2 GW of Series Seven come online. As we indicated, that Series Seven has an ASP entitlement you can assume is already reflected in the backlog in some cases, but in some cases it may not be. Maybe some upside from that. It also has a $0.01-$0.02 cost advantage based on true cost per watt on sales rate. You're gonna get the benefit of that coming through as well in 2023.
Thank you. Our next question is from Joseph Osha with Guggenheim Partners.
Hello, gentlemen. Congratulations on continuing to represent American solar manufacturing so well. Two questions for you. First, I'm wondering, given the relatively recent shift in policy we've seen vis-à-vis Section 201 and the bifacial exemption, have you seen that manifest in terms of pricing conversations for your more recent bookings? And then secondly, Mark, perhaps you could clarify. Obviously, you're sort of pushing forward with Ohio, but I did think I heard some comments from you vis-à-vis 2023 and some maybe fluidity to the plans there depending on policy. If you could clarify that would be great.
Yeah. Look, on the policy side, just in general around, you know, Section 201 and clearly we were disappointed with the bifacial exemption that was provided. You know, the reality is, for me, the way I look at this, the module has many different attributes, but every module basically takes photons and makes electrons. How you choose to do that, you know, we talk about our attributes a lot. We talk about our spectral response and our ability to be advantageous as it relates to, you know, moisture in the air and humidity. You know, we talk about our temperature coefficient, and we talk about our shading response as an example.
You know, those are all attributes which take, you know, advantage of your technology beyond just the labeled watts and turning photons into electrons, and the bifaciality is nothing more than that. It is just another attribute that allows for additional energy generated from a module that takes photons and makes electrons. There, to me, is no common sense rational reason why, you know, bifacial modules would be exempt. It'd be no different than if somebody took any attribute. It could be long-term degradation, you know, a long-term degradation rate. You could say that if you have a long-term degradation rate that's below X, then you'd be exempt from, you know, the 201 duties, which to me wouldn't make any sense, nor does the bifacial exemption in itself make any sense.
You know, as it relates to our customers, they value the relationship with First Solar. They value our willingness to deliver and to honor our contracts and to stand by them in times that we're challenged in right now. That's why we refer to our, you know, customers as partners. We partner in times of when things are going well and when things are more challenging, right? We're gonna work together, and we'll find solutions so we can enable each other's success. As we look to this as, again, a marathon, a long-term journey of which we're just on the front end of the world of electrification. All that world of electrification starts by turning photons into electrons, and we'll do that better than anyone else. Our partners wanna work with us.
Yes, there's some policy angst and, you know, ebbs and flows, but nobody can look around the corner and say for certain that any of our competitors, you know, again, vastly Chinese competitors, will be able to stand by our partners, you know, through their journey and the uncertainty of things that could happen. It does play to our strength. If you just look at our, I mean, we just booked 12 GW. We have a mid to late stage pipeline of 27 GW. After those 12 GW were booked, we've got, including early stage, we've got 55 GW. Both of those pipeline metrics are up about 10 GW from what we talked about during the last earnings call, and we just booked 12 GW. There's lots of opportunity.
You know, I think our value proposition, our uniqueness of our technology, our growth plan, our expansion, being America's solar company along the lines, Joe, of what you referenced, you know, means a lot in the market that we're in right now. I think it plays to our strength. As it relates to growth, we talked before about growth. You know, we've got capacity expansion for 2 new factories, one here in Ohio, another in India. We've mentioned that we are working to evaluate a further expansion. As this pipeline, you know, or backlog of bookings and then pipeline of opportunities continues to grow, you know, we get to a point where we're gonna need to start evaluating expansion beyond what we've already committed to. You know, is there another factory of 3 GW?
Is there another 2 factories? It could be 6 GW. You know, to be determined, but it's all driven off the fundamentals of demand in the marketplace, our relative position, and our ability to sell forward. We'll keep you updated. All we're trying to do is to let people know that, hey, we're working through that, and we're working very closely with our tool suppliers to enable that opportunity if it were to come about.
Thank you. Our next question is from Keith Stanley with Wolfe Research.
Hi. Thank you. First, just some clarifications on the 2022 guidance, and appreciate the detail you've given. How much did the Japan and O&M business operations contribute to earnings for the year separate from the gain you've noted? I just wanna confirm the year-end cash balance includes the planned sales.
Yeah. There's very limited assumed contribution from the O&M business and the Japan business. The assumption is we wouldn't sell any assets this year. All of that would be reflected in the sale of the business and come through in the gain on sale. You're seeing that full number be $270 million-$219 million. There's about an additional $10 million of value associated with the sale of the O&M business. You're seeing limited assumption of ongoing revenue and earnings for the time that we keep that business. The view there being that gets all lumped into the gain on the sale. From a cash perspective, yes, the assumption is the value and the cash from that sale is in the cash number at year-end.
Perfect. Thank you. Our next question is from J.B. Lowe with Citi.
Hey, Mark, Alex, Mitch. Question was, Mark, you mentioned previously about your 2023 ASPs being down about $0.003, but on a net basis from freight it would be up about $0.01. I'm just wondering if you would just walk through the puts and takes of that piece. My other question was just on, you know, given what we have seen so far out of Europe in terms of responses to the ongoing crisis over there. Have you? I know it's only been, you know, a few days here, but, like, have you guys been engaging with customers in Europe potentially?
I mean, this goes kind of to the expansion question, but even ahead of that, have you been engaging any further with customers in, I guess, new or unexpected places since this has all started? Thanks.
Yeah. On the ASP, the way I would look at it is there's about 30% of our contracts in 2022 that have some freight adjuster. Again, just to put it back in perspective, to look at where we were a year ago, in Q1 of 2021, sales freight, when we reported our number, was about $0.25 cents. We've gone from $0.25 cents in Q1 of last year to $0.05 cents a watt. We generally have assumed historically around $0.02 cents. That's kind of what our implied assumption, 'cause that's what it's been historically. As we continue to drive watts up, it dilutes the average, you know, freight dollars to improve cents per watt and everything else.
We saw this dramatic shift start to happen in kind of Q2 of 2021, so we started modifying our contracts such that we weren't carrying that entire freight risk. There are adjusters. Now, not all of the benefits of the adjusters flow into 2022. They start to flow into a much higher percentage. About 70% or so of 2023 will have freight adjusters. Really everything forward from 2023 will have some form of freight adjuster associated with them. When you think about it, you got $0.05 as a headwind in this year's results that you're gonna recover some nominal amount back from the customer. You will see some adjustments to ASP as we progress throughout the year. Maybe it ends up being about $0.015 somewhere.
Excuse me, about a half a penny. You're gonna see our ASPs will trend up from what's in our backlog right now as the sales freight adjusters are reflected for 2022 shipments. When you do that same math in looking how we structured our freight rate, there's about a penny and a half that will come through in 2023. The year-on-year, when you look at apples to apples, ASPs, because of that recovery on the sales freight, is gonna go up about a penny. You're thinking about your 27 this year is probably gonna end up the full year closer at 27 and a half, and then you got about a penny of that upside to that ASP going into, you know, 2023. Now this all assumes that sales freight stays at $0.05 cents.
If it goes up to $0.06, well, then that adjuster's gonna be higher because I'm still only really carrying about $0.025 of the total sales freight risk. My customer's gonna pay me and compensate me for anything above and beyond that. The other piece that will be accretive to ASPs as we go into 2023 is, you know, we refer to them as the technology or platform adjusters, right? So, we've contracted with customers just to look at a baseline product. A baseline product basically is what we're producing today, call it a 465, you know, standard CuRe product.
If we do anything above that, if the bins get better, if the temp co gets better, the LTR gets better, if it comes bifacial, whatever it may be, Series 7 will have a premium on it, and that starts flowing into 2023 as well. All those become incremental to the ASPs. Because while they're structured contractually that way, but we don't have certainty out of the exact product that will be delivered, we can't reflect it into our contracted backlog. Those will be realized over time, and then you'll see those benefits improve the contracted backlog. That's the point we were trying to make.
Thank you. Our next question is from Ben Kallo with Baird.
Hey, thanks for taking my question. Has any of this, you know, the freight costs, you know, and doubling, has that changed any of your thoughts around doing long-term contracts, as you look out into, you know, 2024? Then could you talk to us about how, you know, how you're selling products from India? Is it, you know, is it more localized when you get out that far? My third question and final question is just, can you talk to us about going to bifacial and how you make that decision and what it means on both a ASP and a cost perspective? Thank you.
Yeah. Hey, one thing before, Ben, before I get to your question, I want to go back to the last question I was asked about Europe and were we seeing anything about Europe. There's been, and I forgot to answer that. I just answered the ASP. As it relates to Europe, we've had ongoing discussions with Europe, and Europe is evolving in their journey similar to what we saw in India, as well as what we're seeing here in the U.S. around creating domestic capabilities around manufacturing. We are engaged. We have had conversations in Europe around manufacturing there. It's one of the opportunities that we're evaluating along with the U.S. and India, for example, for any further capacity expansion. Forgot to cover that one, but you hit it.
Ben, on our freight cost, again, what we're doing is just think of it as I'm telling the customer that our base price is X and we'll take $0.025. As we go into volumes that go out into 2024 and 2025, any volatility to that number is really results in a variable ASP. If it stays at $0.05, as I go out into 2024 and 2025, there'll be an incremental ASP such that, you know, our customer will actually then, you know, cover that incremental sales freight cost. Largely ours is fixed at $0.025.
We think that's a manageable position to take as we contract forward, and our partners see it the same way, that there should be some element of risk-sharing and given the uncertainty of what's going on in the market and who knows how long it will continue. I do think that we've come to a reasonable balanced approach around how we're thinking about sales trade and how we're contracting as we go forward. India pipeline, there's a lot going on. There's a lot of opportunity. You know, India, it doesn't generally book out in as far of a horizon. You know, you normally are gonna see them maybe looking to secure modules about a year out, in terms of when the expected deliveries are needed.
You know, we're still looking second half of 2023, so we're more than a year out to when the factory will be up and running, and we're being a little careful with loading the front-end production with selling that volume through at this point in time, just because it could be potential delays. You know, unanticipated events could happen that could delay the project or the construction schedule or the tool install that we don't wanna commit to volumes with our customers. We're leaving the front end, say the first quarter, kinda open right now until we have higher level of certainty. We're further along in the construction as well as the install of the tools to commit to volumes with our customers. But it's not for lack of interest and demand.
We've got a lot of opportunities in the pipeline and I think you're gonna see multiple gigawatts of bookings before the end of the year for India. Bifacial, it's really an energy gain, right? And if you look at it should get you know, let's say you know, our bifaciality is gonna be a little bit lower than where crystalline silicon is right now, but we're still gonna give probably in the range of 1%-2% of energy. And energy, depending on what markets you're in, is worth, say, $0.0075-$0.015.
You've got an ASP opportunity premium for bifaciality, and call it in the range of, you know, if you get 2%, it's gonna be $0.015. If you get $0.015 cents for 1% of energy, it's gonna be close to, you know, $0.03. You're somewhere between $0.015 and $0.03 on ASP. You know, no different than crystalline silicon. There'll be some trade-offs, some of the balance system costs because of row space and other things that you may need to do to capture the full benefit of the Bifaciality. There may be some incremental BOS costs, which, you know, we'll actually then pull from that ASP entitlement.
As we currently see it right now, it would be accretive. It'll drive, you know, a higher ASP, and, you know, it's another value of energy, and we sell energy. All right. It's not labeled watts, it's the actual energy profile that comes out of the module.
Thank you, presenters. That's all the time that we have for today. This concludes today's conference. Thank you again for your participation, and have a wonderful day. You may all disconnect.