Solar panel efficency
in [Design]
|
From: Robert Baer on 30 May 2010 17:20 I did a survey and this is the best i got. Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on the web). Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given panel)? Is there another (commercially available) technology even more efficient?
From: Artemus on 30 May 2010 17:40 "Robert Baer" <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote in message news:9e-dnUxMSfcAS5_RnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet... > I did a survey and this is the best i got. > Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & > monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film > cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium > selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin > film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). > > The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on > the web). > > Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion > of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given > panel)? > Is there another (commercially available) technology even more efficient? Are you restricted in the available real estate on which to put your collector(s)? Are you concerned about the cost to place them in orbit? If not then you may want to consider the $/watt efficiency instead. Or not. Art
From: Tim Wescott on 30 May 2010 17:43 On 05/30/2010 02:20 PM, Robert Baer wrote: > I did a survey and this is the best i got. > Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & > monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film > cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium > selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin > film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). > > The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on the > web). > > Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion of > light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given > panel)? > Is there another (commercially available) technology even more efficient? Big projects seem to lean toward concentrating a bunch of light on a Stirling engine. http://www.stirlingenergy.com/. -- Tim Wescott Control system and signal processing consulting www.wescottdesign.com
From: Spehro Pefhany on 30 May 2010 18:16 On Sun, 30 May 2010 14:20:26 -0700, the renowned Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: > I did a survey and this is the best i got. > Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & >monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film >cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium >selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin >film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). > > The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on >the web). > > Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion >of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given >panel)? > Is there another (commercially available) technology even more efficient? Oh, something like multijunction single-crystal GaAs or InS probably, but unless you've got a NASA level budget you probably can't afford them. The usual efficiency criteria for ground-based applications is $/peak watt. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany -- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff(a)interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
From: Martin Riddle on 30 May 2010 19:38
"Robert Baer" <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote in message news:9e-dnUxMSfcAS5_RnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet... > I did a survey and this is the best i got. > Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & > monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film > cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium > gallium selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline > (silicon?) (Thin film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not > mentioned). > > The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on > the web). > > Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion > of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for > given panel)? > Is there another (commercially available) technology even more > efficient? Monocrystalline , well established reliability. Your survey was insufficient, are you into management? I found this with out trying hard... <http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build05/PDF/b05047.pdf> I expected to find more at http://photovoltaics.sandia.gov/pv_systems_reliability.htm But it looks like it was stripped of info. Cheers |