- Related Stories
-
Silicon vs. CIGS: With solar energy, the issue is material
October 2, 2006 -
Solar industry chases a cheaper kilowatt
March 9, 2006
The San Jose, Calif.-based company on Monday announced its second-generation, higher-power product at the Solar Power 2006 conference, and the panels are expected to be in mass production next year.
SunPower says it has managed to increase efficiency of the silicon cells from 20 percent to 22 percent. Further, the 5-foot by 3-and-a-half-foot panels will pack 96 individual cells within them, compared to the 72 contained in the company?s current product.
Overall, these changes result in a 43 percent increase in power, said Julie Blunden, vice president of external affairs at SunPower. Each panel can generate 315 watts of electricity and will have roughly the same cost per watt as the existing line, she said.
The theoretical limit of monocrystalline silicon cell efficiency is about 25 percent, Blunden said.
Other companies are developing solar photovoltaic manufacturing techniques around other materials, notably CIGS (copper indium gallium selenide).
But SunPower, which is owned by Cypress Semiconductor, intends to continue investing in higher solar efficiency and ways to lower the cost of installation, Blunden said.
See more CNET content tagged:
efficiency,
solar energy






Charlie
kakodes_too
Certainly we should protect the environment. But instead we should focus on eliminating coal/oil energy plants which are responsible for most of the pollution and replace them with efficient and powerful alternatives that could meet the future supply.
In that sense, I am confident that the only real solution is nuclear power based on a far modern design (such as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_amplifier ). Fusion might be long way ahead but fission energy can be far greener than the public thinks.
The key is to learn to use the energy we have in a more efficient manner. Using solar panels for shingles is still too expensive (The more of us who do it, the cheaper it will get). Everyone can add insulation to there houses and upgrade/calk there windows.
Over the long term we can not use more energy than the total solar output collected by the Earth. Anything we burn more than that is deficit spending.
>Over the long term we can not use more energy than the total solar output collected by the Earth.
Not necessarily. It depends on how long term you're talking about. Have you heard of Kardashav Scale, Dyson Sphere? In any case the solar energy output could hardly be nonneglible in the near future unless entire cities are covered by panels. And consequently by the time we reach the sufficient wind/solar plant know-how, their output will be inconsequential.
However you will look like one yourself if you don't point out any flaws in my thinking. The arguments I am making were first proposed by Freeman Dyson, a gentleman considered to be one of the smartest men alive.
With a name like spacebuff I would think you would know who he is.
You sir, may not be an idiot, however if you study hard you one day may reach that level of intelligences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson
My wife and I lived aboard our sailboat for almost 8 years relying on solar and wind for our energy requirements. Admittedly, we were working with a 12 VDC system, but the principle is the same for higher voltages. The panels we used were about the same size as the article and generated 51 watts each. We used 4 in parallel for a total panel output of 204 watts. But that was 12 amps @ 17.2 VDC (I know, that comes out to 206.4 watts). We had a voltage limiter installed which fed our batteries a max of 14.8 volts so we would not cook them.. So the actual usable output was about 177.6 watts. Our efficiency was therefore, 86 % based on available to actual. The rest was lost to heat.
Our windmill put out about 70 watts @ 10 knots of wind, and supplemented our solar, especially on overcast (& windy) days. There were times when we had to supplement wind/solar with our diesel engine, but with the massive house battery bank we had aboard, we could go for 4 days before we had to run the engine. We could also charge out starting batteries at the same time, if needed.
With the new breed of solar panels, one would have been sufficient for our daily energy requirement of 1.2 KW. We had TV, stereo, navigation instruments (GPS (2), Loran), 3 VHF radios, autopilot, inverter for small power tools, etc., but we were energy conscious, too.
To supply energy using wind/solar for a community, it must be converted into a useable form. Most present homes rely on the good old 120 VAC, and every time you convert to a different form of the energy, you lose a minimum of 10 %. It is therefore imperative that those conversion losses be kept to a minimum.
The major problem with energy today, is not that we don?t have enough, but the population is growing to fast and generating excessive demand. When I was born, the population in this country was about 30 % of what it is today. The huge population growth plus all the so called convenience items on the market, including computers, cell phones, IPods, whatever, all contribute to energy demands. More people, more air conditioners, more washers, dryers, rechargeable devices and on & on. And that is just this country. The same situation exists world wide.
I wouldn?t quibble about the numbers in the article. Look further and apply some basic math and ask what the useable output is. Ask how the energy is converted to something that can be transported to where it is needed, and then, at the end of the pipeline, ask just how much of the 315 watts are available for use. I wouldn?t be surprised that it is in the neighborhood of 60 %.
There is just a little more to it than numbers, young fellas.
They were going off about nukes and methane gas? As an old guy myself? I don?t need to hear about flatulence? when Solar Power is such an elegant solution.
I opted to look into solar power... and I?m delighted I did!
It was amazingly simple? and financially rewarding!
I called the two companies that use the nice SunPower 200 watt units.... (black... aesthetics are important on top of my home (I don?t care for the industrial look of the more common panels)).
NextEnergy (SF Bay Area... very much like Akeena Solar) gave the best analysis... and bid!
They did all the work and took care of all the permits? and rebates ($$$).
They were even going to arrange for financing? but if I?ve got nothing? I?ve got credit!
It was a real eye opener!
I now have a 4.2 KW panel on my roof? and am signed up with PG&E as a power provider (zero net metering).
If a few of these gas bags took a few minutes? to call for a free analysis? (yes? free!)
They could enjoy the same revelation that we did? Solar deserves a serious discussion.
Thanks again!
My sister saw our unit and purchased a system herself... Very happy? and truly feeling all green
My monthly payments have yet to exceed my old PG&E bills? with the delightful difference that they are capital dollars (going into my pocket)? instead of expense dollars? and the investment has added real value to our property? TAX FREE.
The analysis will evaluate your usage? and calculate how many years it takes to pay off the system? before your power is completely free (So now I will be able to remain retired? every time there a rate increase? it?s like getting a pay raise).
I would encourage everyone with a concern for their wallet to call for a free estimate?
Solar power deserves a serious discussion... I bought in... and I love it!
Many solar panels on the market have a better negative 5 percent tolerance rating (Lower is better) For example their 215 watt solar panel has a negative 8% tolerance so this manufacturer would only guaranty that you would get 197.8 watts right out of the box even though you paid for 215 watts.
It says so right on their specification sheet, see (peak power tolerance) So if this new panel only has a peak power tolerance of negative 8 percent, you would be paying for 315 watts but they will only guaranty that you'll get 289.8 watts right out of the box. So much for efficiency !
You are correct? many sources will not sell to just anybody? but there are good reasons for concern. A photovoltaic system is DC (direct current)? which can pose some very serious fire and electrocution concerns.
I have three 7 panel arrays? and their combined voltages are 600 plus volts (4.2KW).
All DC should be run in substantial metal conduit? and well grounded, fused and alarmed.
My solar company threw in 5 years of free surveillance? in addition to their 25 year warranty on the panels and 15 years on the <in-grid> ?SunnyBoy? inverter.
I think it was all well worth all the additional expense.
I would really encourage you to contact a couple of good companies? for a free analysis. You will be surprised at how detailed their analysis is? and if nothing else it will get you 75% of the way through your design? and $$ savings is a real motivator!
BUT? you really can get a good system going for yourself?
If you want to take it all on yourself? design, permits? contracts with the power company? rebates (at least in California) your power company rebates might not apply? but you can cut overall system costs by about 40%... on eBay.
Check it out!
Good luck no matter what you decide?If you proceed? you will be delighted!
There is some real money to be saved!
Best regards,
CF
-
by Ning711
January 16, 2009 12:16 AM PST
- The cost for to decommissioning a nuclear power plant after his time life (of 25 to 35 years service) is a big burden. Great Britain is actually confronted to this problem, and Germany has stopped to build new nuclear power plant.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(37 Comments)