Solar cell
in [Design]
|
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 25 Apr 2010 21:11 On 25/04/2010 11:15, Paul Keinanen wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 18:54:35 -0700, "Joel Koltner" > <zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message >> news:pi67t5pmefeen4jn1i5c96v6rd2jmqt97f(a)4ax.com... > >>> After forty years of trying (at least), what makes you believe it's possible >>> to jump a couple of orders of magnitude ($/W). >> >> One order of magnitude would be plenty though, in the case of PV. > > As long as PV cells are made by cutting wafers out of huge pure > silicon crystals, the price is not going to go down significantly, no > matter what subsidies are used. > > Perhaps someone invents how to grow the cells on a flexible base > material that can be processed roll to roll just like paper > processing, the price might drop one or two orders of magnitude. Just > cover the roof and walls of a building with sheets of flexible solar > cells. It's called thin film processing eg Nanosolar Watch them being printed: http://www.nanosolar.com/technology -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Michael A. Terrell on 25 Apr 2010 21:48 mpm wrote: > > On Apr 23, 8:19 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...(a)On-My- > Web-Site.com> wrote: > > > When I grew up there, it wasn't like that. The cafeteria ladies were > > from your own neighborhood. If you didn't eat your green beans they'd > > call your mother :-( > > > > They had telephones back then?? :) Well, That had to do SOMETHING with all the empty soup cans... -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
From: Paul Keinanen on 26 Apr 2010 00:16 On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 02:04:55 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On 24/04/2010 00:57, Joel Koltner wrote: >> Well clearly photovoltaics is incredibly useful as well, with plenty of >> immediate application. If someone figured out how to decimate the per-kW >> cost of PV panels, their growth rate would immediately jump up into the >> triple digits, I expect. > >Current prices are around $4/W >Nanosolar, for example, claims they can manufacture for $0.70/W >But since they are selling everything they can produce for a lot more >than that, why would they drop the price? Those prices are based on peak output. A fixed mounted panel average daily output is one quarter of the peak output during the best season. When calculated with the average power, those price should be multiplied by four, thus $16/W. During other seasons, the solar angle is less favorable, so calculated with the annual average output power, the price is even higher. Using a dual axis tracker the average annual output can be increased, but this also increases the costs. Compare this with the construction cost of $2-$3/W for nuclear and $1-$2/W for conventional power (especially gas turbines, but of course, the fuel cost is significant). The peak power price should drop with one order of magnitude, before the PV cells are competitive.
From: Joel Koltner on 26 Apr 2010 12:19 Hi Keith, <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message news:hte7t5divi6qa1pgjahb0tfka7v5c0q0jf(a)4ax.com... > But they've had free access to every other semi breakthrough and still can't > come within two orders of magnitude of interesting. I think it's more like "one order of magnitude of interesting," but I realize that's pretty subjective. > It's not working. Diesel has been around as long as gasoline. Yeah, but up until the past couple of decades, the engines were a lot more cantankerous than gasoline-powered engines. You still see glow-plug switches on some trucks today, yet even the cheapest automobile hasn't had a manual throttle in about 35 years now. Bizarre... > You mean VNET? Yep, that was it. Very slick for the time -- being able to e-mail anyone within IBM and print to any printer anywhere. I was working out of Madison, WI (we just did sales & customer installs/service -- no software/hardware development), the 128kbps, I think it was (might have only been 64kbps) leased-line we had went back to Rochester, Minnesota. ---Joel
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 26 Apr 2010 13:03
On 26/04/2010 05:16, Paul Keinanen wrote: > On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 02:04:55 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 24/04/2010 00:57, Joel Koltner wrote: > >>> Well clearly photovoltaics is incredibly useful as well, with plenty of >>> immediate application. If someone figured out how to decimate the per-kW >>> cost of PV panels, their growth rate would immediately jump up into the >>> triple digits, I expect. >> >> Current prices are around $4/W >> Nanosolar, for example, claims they can manufacture for $0.70/W >> But since they are selling everything they can produce for a lot more >> than that, why would they drop the price? > > Those prices are based on peak output. > > A fixed mounted panel average daily output is one quarter of the peak > output during the best season. When calculated with the average power, > those price should be multiplied by four, thus $16/W. During other > seasons, the solar angle is less favorable, so calculated with the > annual average output power, the price is even higher. > > Using a dual axis tracker the average annual output can be increased, > but this also increases the costs. > > Compare this with the construction cost of $2-$3/W for nuclear and > $1-$2/W for conventional power (especially gas turbines, but of > course, the fuel cost is significant). > > The peak power price should drop with one order of magnitude, before > the PV cells are competitive. The "magic" number that has always been quoted for cost competitive solar electricity is $1 per Watt peak. Obviously for domestic users competing with grid cost it's probably a lot more favourable eg around $2 per peak Watt (and right now it is possible to buy such raw units at that retail price). -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show |