Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power Technology

Solar Panel Breaks "Third of a Sun" Efficiency Barrier 237

Zothecula writes "Embattled photovoltaic solar power manufacturer Amonix announced on Tuesday that it has broken the solar module efficiency record, becoming the first manufacturer to convert more than a third of incoming light energy into electricity – a goal once branded 'one third of a sun' in a Department of Energy initiative. The Amonix module clocked an efficiency rating of 33.5 percent."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Solar Panel Breaks "Third of a Sun" Efficiency Barrier

Comments Filter:
  • We'd also save billions of dollars if we stopped selling clothes dryers that are hideously inefficiency; elsewhere in the world condensing dryers are the norm and in some cases dry clothes faster.

    I think the prevalence of gas-powered dryers is a reason the U.S. still uses more inefficient dryers, because the fuel (natural gas) is fairly cheap, and much cheaper than with the electric-powered dryers that are prevalent in parts of Europe. So there's less economic incentive to improve efficiency.

  • I'd do it tomorrow (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rueger ( 210566 ) * on Saturday November 03, 2012 @04:58PM (#41867413) Homepage
    I never seriously looked at solar and other "off the grid" options until investigating a house on an island off Vancouver.

    It was new, purpose built, so had some obvious advantages, but what I took away from it was:
    • All electricity was from solar panels on the roof, with a small generator for backup when running things like power tools.
    • All water was from captured and filter/UVed rainwater.
    • Cooking and refrigeration was propane powered.
    • Woodstove for heating.

    Obviously location and climate matter, but at the end of the day it was a viable and practical option, and one that made economic sense as well.

    Sooner or later some bright government will figure out that by heavily subsidizing the installation of solar in homes they'll a) Develop a very viable industry b) drop solar costs due to volume c) get relected because everyone's electric bills will drop d) boost the economy because the money that was going to the electric company can be spent elsewhere. Now, I'm still a fan of hydroelectricity - if you need to generate electrical without generating CO2 and pollution, and without the no-nukes crowd at your door, there isn't a better way to go.

  • Re:**YAWN** (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ThatsMyNick ( 2004126 ) on Saturday November 03, 2012 @04:59PM (#41867417)

    It already is. Once you set up the panels, the price per watt is 0 (which is less than non-renewable sources, and as low as it will ever get)

  • Re:**YAWN** (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) * on Saturday November 03, 2012 @05:13PM (#41867485) Homepage Journal

    For almost any new building it is worth covering the roof with solar PV. It might take 10-15 years to recover the cost, but then it is all profit. The savings are even bigger if you combine PV with solar heating. Installation is cheaper at the time of construction and the cost is a small fraction of the roof budget, let alone the cost of the whole building. If you are taking a mortgage then the cash from feed-in tariffs will more than cover the extra cost of the panels on your monthly payment.

    Note: Based in building in the UK, further south it makes even more sense.

  • Re:**YAWN** (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tsotha ( 720379 ) on Saturday November 03, 2012 @05:54PM (#41867833)
    Concentrated cells tend to wear out much more quickly. They get much hotter, and junction heat is what determines the life of any semiconductor.
  • Re:**YAWN** (Score:4, Interesting)

    by realityimpaired ( 1668397 ) on Saturday November 03, 2012 @06:42PM (#41868187)

    Not really... the point he was making is that the energy is there to be collected, and once the system is installed the maintenance costs are negligible. Many solar installations don't need any maintenance at all beyond keeping the panels clean.

    The initial installation costs a lot of money (which is becoming less and less every year), but you can sell any extra electricity you produce back into the grid, and the reduction in your monthly electric bill should be significant enough to make it worth considering. In most cases, the reduction in your bill will be more than enough to cover the cost of the loan to have the panels installed in the first place, and in some cases you'll find yourself in a position where the power company is paying you each month.

  • by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Saturday November 03, 2012 @07:31PM (#41868433)

    Anyhow, if there were any real market for alternative energy (especially Solar, as I live in the middle of Texas), my electric co-operative power company would already be using it.

    What if electric was a net gain (returns 5% on investment) but doesn't meet the minimum 10% ROI for the coop to implement it? What if the issue is that, if land and backhaul were free, it would be marketable, but a power company building a solar plant doesn't get free land and free infrastructure? You do. You've already bought the land your house is on, and paid for the infrastructure to that house, so the land and infrastructure are free. Just because someone can't make a profit on selling it doesn't mean it isn't worth doing. If every home in the US had panels on the roof, that would eliminate the peak summer loads, and would supply a surplus so that storage, rather than peak generation, would be the next problem to tackle. And the industrial sites would always use more than they can generate, so we'd end up where industrial sites would pay the power company, and the power company would pay millions of home owners.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03, 2012 @07:33PM (#41868455)

    That's simply not true.

    I was looking to reduce my electricity usage, so I bought myself a decent clothes rack, and stopped using the dryer. But then I actually purchased a meter and measured the power usage of my dryer and calculated that it would take me five years to pay back the $50 I spent on the clothes rack. The amount of power the dryer used was utterly insignificant in the scheme of things. However, since then my dryer broke down, and I've never bothered to buy a new one, because the clothes rack does a good enough job. (It helps living somewhere with low humidity, and lots of sun).

    Maybe if you have a large family, and are running the dryer nearly every day then hanging the clothes out would make a difference, but otherwise you're probably better off looking for other places to save energy first.

  • Re:Solar cells (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04, 2012 @11:57AM (#41872667)

    "Batteries never die, they're always murdered".

    Ah ha ha ha, love that quote.

    At work (railway) we had a location drawing ~200mA that we had to move about 500 meters. Somewhere along the lines, nobody bothered to order a new power drop and the old one had to be removed to make room for something else. We were promised a power connection within a month, so we stuck up 80watts of solar and 100Ah of battery. Problem... the sun window is small (mountains, you win again!) and there's a lot of cloud cover at this location. Solution, 1000watt Honda suitcase generator (sweet little unit) filled up with gas on Monday and Thursday. The generator automatically shuts off once the fuel runs out (excellent feature really) some time when the batteries have (hopefully) enough juice to last till the next time the generator is started.

    2 months later with no power utility, we suspected it wasn't going to go as planned, and we didn't want to ruin our marvelous and expensive wet Ni-Cd batteries, so we swapped them out for 3 marine grade deep cycle lead acid batteries from the hardware store with a total of about 270Ah. That ought to do it.

    Yeah... not!

    Turns out, twice a week isn't enough to keep them full, the charger we had was only 10amp output with a horrible efficiency while power lifting (efficient and reliable at float, and designed to be powered by the grid), and the generator wouldn't run long enough to fill them up. I also suspect the equipment is drawing more current than we were told and nobody bothered measuring it.

    Your comment: "Batteries never die, they're always murdered" cracks me up. Basically twice every week we would run these batteries dry. I'm not talking down to 10 or 11Vdc, I'm talking 4Vdc. This piece of equipment was deemed to be unworthy of overtime, so if it failed Sunday some time, it would sit with a load on the batteries until Monday around 10:00 am. Apparently you're not supposed to do this?

    7 months in and this location is starting to fail every day and the generator needs to be re-filled almost constantly. We're also being promised a utility connection within a month....

    Boss comes in and gives us 300Ah of Ni-CD and 40amps of efficient chargers. He also tells us to take those consumer junk batteries to the trash (recycle), and that the power utility is for SURE getting us power before December (the pole and transformer are up now, so it's looking promising!)

    Incidentally... I found a warranty card (12 month replacement warranty) for one of the batteries. Co-worker figures no way the store will honour a warranty for us, but seeing as how the documentation nowhere mentions the name of the railway, I figure it's worth a shot. Wouldn't you know... the minimum wage clerk thinks it is hilarious how fast their diagnostic equipment failed the battery (I tested 7amp leakage current on my bench) and hands me a brand new 90Ah marine battery that is safely sitting on the shelf in my shed connected to a float charger waiting to come camping with me next summer. My co-worker and I now have a special drawer for battery warranty cards.

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Working...