Solar power for consumers at $2 per watt?
From what I have heard, the efficiency of solar cells is at best about 40 percent or so. That is not good enough at current manufacturing costs to make it possible for the technology to compete with other forms of power that consumers can purchase. So, either the efficiency must increase or the cost to produce the cells must decrease. It looks like Professor W.S. Sampath from Colorado State University has developed a technique to create solar cells without the pricey silicon, therefore making the cells cheaper to make. However, it appears that the efficiency is not quite up to par yet with the current standards. In any case, the cost per watt of the power could potentially drop to the point that solar does become cost-effective for the average consumer to consider. That's good news, and maybe the efficiency could increase with more development, making this truly a win-win scenario.[Source: Slashdot via Engadget]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Stewart 4:15PM (1/25/2008)
As long as States like Florida and California are offering State rebates for solar panels on your house then the manufactorers are not going to lower the price. Florida offers 4.00 per watt rebate. Why would a manufactorer sell a panel for 1 or 2 dollars a watt when someone is willing to pay 4.00 plus 2 to 4 dollars a watt a panel knowing the state will reimburse up to 4 dollas a watt.
Reply
Josh Brown 12:21PM (9/25/2007)
Actually, I thought that 40% efficiency for solar cells was the absolute maximum obtained in lab tests for recent research units. I think the average efficiency for currently available solar cells is around 15-25%
Reply
Kardax 12:59PM (9/25/2007)
Efficiency really isn't that important. Price per watt is. If a cheap solar panel is only 10% efficient, so be it, just buy a lot more of them :)
Reply
bioburner 8:27PM (9/25/2007)
Whow solar pv cells at $1 per watt by the end of the year. How fast can they cover my roof?
Reply
mike 10:42PM (9/25/2007)
You've got to remember, Coal is cheap because the coal industry does not pay for clean up or mercury pollution or mud slides, to name a few "externalities". But, they do put a lot of money into politics.
Oil is cheap because your taxes are paying for 3 fleets in the Arabian Sea.
Reply
John B 12:20PM (9/26/2007)
From the linked article:
"Sampath has developed a continuous, automated manufacturing process for solar panels using glass coating with a cadmium telluride thin film instead of the standard high-cost crystalline silicon."
I'm interested in how much cadmium will be used. Cadmium is a particularly nasty (i.e. toxic) metal.
Reply
dr61 12:49PM (9/26/2007)
Mike is correct; solar PV power is currently economical in relatively sunny climates when considering total impact of power generation. In many electric markets it is also economical using traditional methods of accounting, with a break even point of 10-15 years. The panels will last 25-100 years.
Another issue: electric power transmission loses average of 40% from central power stations to user. That loss is practically eliminated with home PV power systems.
I just installed a system at $5/watt and have no regrets. Fossil fuel power generation costs are only going to go up.
Dave
Reply
Chris M 6:49PM (9/26/2007)
Yes, Cadmium is toxic, but the answer to "how much is used in a thin film CdTe solar cell" is "Not much". It certainly isn't as much as used in NiCd batteries, or used in "Cadmium Yellow" oil paints on artworks. CdTe cells will be sealed to prevent damage and release of Cadmium, and may have instructions for safe recycling on them.
Reply
Manu Sharma 10:03AM (9/27/2007)
Average efficiency of flat panel solar PV in production is 14-15%. There are a few cells by SunPower that work at 22% but they're somewhat expensive and not very common.
The 40% efficient cells are several hundred times more expensive and are used only in concentrator applications and/or on satellites. Never in flat panels.
Reply