|
Pond Scum
|
 |
« on: May 08, 2008, 12:25:48 PM » |
|
Well, I just thought I would share this with everyone. This was reported by USA Today, but I will post the piece from the MIT Technology Review. From May 7th......... A Hollywood-based solar startup says that it will soon be able to produce electricity from the sun at costs that are competitive with fossil-fuel generation. The key is the company's dramatic improvement in the performance of concentrated photovoltaic technology.
Sunrgi, which emerged out of stealth mode last week, has created a concentrated photovoltaic system that uses a lens to focus sunlight up to 2,000 times onto tiny solar cells that can convert 37.5 percent of the sun's energy into electricity. Stronger concentrations of sunlight allow engineers to use much smaller solar cells, making it more economical to use higher-efficiency--but higher-cost--cells. Sunrgi, for example, will use cells based on gallium arsenside and germanium substrates.
Paul Sidlo, one of seven founding partners of Sunrgi, says that the system uses four times less photovoltaic material than other approaches, which typically aim for 500 times sun concentration. This includes systems being developed by California rivals SolFocus and Soliant Energy.
"We've miniaturized everything," Sidlo says. "What this leads to is reduced cost, and the big breakthrough here is all about lower cost." The company has also designed its system to be produced on slightly modified computer assembly lines, enabling further savings through high-volume production. The higher efficiency also means that a solar park built with Sunrgi's modules could use one-sixteenth of the space needed with conventional thin-film solar cells, adds Sidlo. The result is lower real-estate costs for developers.
Sunrgi estimates that its system will be capable of producing electricity at a wholesale cost of five cents per kilowatt-hour. Prototypes have been built and tested both in the laboratory and in the field, and the company expects to start commercial production in 12 to 15 months. "It's quite an aggressive claim," says Daniel Friedman, a solar-energy researcher at the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). He says that most others in the space are still working toward seven or eight cents per kilowatt-hour. "I can't say Sunrgi won't achieve what it's claiming, but right now, it's just on paper, and costs like that are only going to be a reality at the large manufacturing level," he says. "Even then, the five-cent figure sounds really optimistic."http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/20737/?a=fOf course these claims have yet to be proven. I hope it is not another flash in the pan with no "real world" impact. Anyways, we should see if this is for real, or not, in about 2 years. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2008, 12:37:43 PM » |
|
I like the sounds of this. May be a company worth investing in...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reaganite
|
|
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2008, 12:46:49 PM » |
|
I so wish!! I would do solar but its so expensive..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MY PREDICTION BASED McCain 291 - Obama 247. Sorry but the math is just not wrong....  |
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2008, 12:57:23 PM » |
|
If there is a way, the market will find it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2008, 01:45:23 PM » |
|
If there is a way, the market will find it.
If there is a way to exploit it the market will. OswaldTheOsprey |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +150/-114
Posts: 1,983
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2008, 04:41:32 PM » |
|
37.5%? I'd have to see the actual data and methodology. That is a factor of four above what anybody else is doing, so I am doubtful. I do have some small knowledge in this filed as I work for a solar company. The concentration idea is interesting, but it completely misses some of the things that make solar cells expensive, which is the interconnect between the cells. We use a different approach so that these interconnects don't have to be done by hand which is how everybody else is doing it. One of our main development thrust is solar integrated into building materials...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it. |
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +205/-201
Posts: 3,879
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2008, 10:02:18 PM » |
|
I heard 17% was the highest available at the moment. And Reaganite, recent inovation in wafer manufacuring as REALLY reduced the price of solar cells LINK. Solar technology IS the future. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
Pond Scum
|
|
« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2008, 12:01:23 AM » |
|
37.5%? I'd have to see the actual data and methodology. That is a factor of four above what anybody else is doing, so I am doubtful. I do have some small knowledge in this filed as I work for a solar company. The concentration idea is interesting, but it completely misses some of the things that make solar cells expensive, which is the interconnect between the cells. We use a different approach so that these interconnects don't have to be done by hand which is how everybody else is doing it. One of our main development thrust is solar integrated into building materials...
I don't think they are too anxious to give too much info, but if you search for SUNERGI and SOLAR, then you will get plenty of info to read. Magnifiers have been tried before, but there has always been a problem with heat. SUNRGI claims to have solved this problem. I sure hope they are not full of it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +150/-114
Posts: 1,983
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2008, 04:19:17 AM » |
|
Not only will I look, but I will ask some of the big brains at work.
Abrax, I haven't heard of anybody doing 17 reliably either. 12 to 14 is more reasonable. As long as it is somebody putting their PV on silicon or glass, true cost-effectiveness will most likely be a fantasy. We use plastic. On a roll to roll to scheme.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it.
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2008, 05:00:43 AM » |
|
If there is a way to exploit it the market will. Dang right. That's how cars were brought to us. Computers. Cell phones. etc etc etc The market brought these things, not government. The market will fix our energy problems if the government stays out of the way. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +205/-201
Posts: 3,879
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2008, 07:49:55 AM » |
|
Not only will I look, but I will ask some of the big brains at work. Report back, please. I'm very curious. Abrax, I haven't heard of anybody doing 17 reliably either. 12 to 14 is more reasonable. As long as it is somebody putting their PV on silicon or glass, true cost-effectiveness will most likely be a fantasy. We use plastic. On a roll to roll to scheme.
Well, I guess "reliably" is a key word. I only remember the number from a Discovery Channel special about what the world will be like in 50 years. It was... interesting and actually a little inspiring. I think they said at preasent we can only really convert the visible spectrum into actual energy, leaving the higher (and more powerful) wavlengths untouched... but I could be mistaken. If there is a way to exploit it the market will. Dang right. That's how cars were brought to us. Computers. Cell phones. etc etc etc ... space flight  . What Richard Branson is doing is REALLY whorth mentioning. Personally, I don't think he gets enough credit for it. The market brought these things, not government. The market will fix our energy problems if the government stays out of the way.
Unless they're offering incentives for innovation. Otherwise, TOTALLY agree. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 09, 2008, 07:51:55 AM by Abraxas »
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
illy
Hero Member
Karma: +94/-105
Posts: 958
illerino if youre not into the whole brevity thing
|
|
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2008, 06:39:29 PM » |
|
I like the sounds of this. May be a company worth investing in...
That was what I was thinking. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see a boom in solar generation in the near future. IMO, it's just a matter of time. At some point, someone is going to make a pile of money on this. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ammunition spitting is him, is it, you listening
Littering written, it\\'s in slippers, get the rebel in him
Sticking it with sinners, sizzlin\\' rhythm, verbally hit him
Did he did it, or did he didn\\'t, admit it -
Rugged Man - Give it Up
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +150/-114
Posts: 1,983
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2008, 06:55:23 PM » |
|
Sorry, I kind of forgot about this.
One of the main draw backs to any concentrator like this, is that in order for them to work you need to track the sun. In 2 axis. So mechanically it is very costly and elaborate. Maintenance intensive also. Not good really for individual installations, but maybe for a utility. Our focus is much different. It is for very simple cheap, durable cells that you install on-site. They will be integrated into building materials. I personally think that the wave of the future is to generate your power right where you use it. It is already shifting towards this in a lot of European markets.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it.
|
|
|
illy
Hero Member
Karma: +94/-105
Posts: 958
illerino if youre not into the whole brevity thing
|
|
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2008, 07:46:51 PM » |
|
Sorry, I kind of forgot about this.
One of the main draw backs to any concentrator like this, is that in order for them to work you need to track the sun. In 2 axis. So mechanically it is very costly and elaborate. Maintenance intensive also. Not good really for individual installations, but maybe for a utility. Our focus is much different. It is for very simple cheap, durable cells that you install on-site. They will be integrated into building materials. I personally think that the wave of the future is to generate your power right where you use it. It is already shifting towards this in a lot of European markets.
Good idea. Transmission drives cost up and efficiency down. However, there will always be a need for collective generation. I'm happy to hear about developments in both respects. One thing I've never understood is why more people don't make use of passive solar for heat. I understand that at the present, panels to generate electricity for a single house are expensive, but it's not so expensive for heat. Besides systems to heat water, I'm surprised that more houses don't have skylight windows. The fact that people aren't using the existing capabilities more than they are makes me question how eager they will be to use new technology. Of course, money talks, and if someone can make an inexpensive product that will allow homeowners to slash their utility bills, people will jump on it. Tracking the sun isn't that great of an obstacle. Computers can direct motors to keep optimal angles. It's interesting that you mention the maintenance issue though. I do some work for a wind developer, and I've been surprised at how much opposition there is to wind turbines. The low maintenance requirements of modern turbines is actually a liability to developers. One of the many gripes I hear about wind farms is that they don't bring enough jobs with them. TBH, I'm curious what the objection will be when solar becomes economically feasible (it's impossible to generate power without pissing someone off). Think of all the blinded birds falling to earth from the glare. You keep those industrial solar generation facilities away from our ornithological society bird sanctuaries! NIMBY! From a business perspective, my thoughts are that cost of maintenance would be worth it compared to how much money could be made, and that this will prove more true with the passing of time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ammunition spitting is him, is it, you listening
Littering written, it\\'s in slippers, get the rebel in him
Sticking it with sinners, sizzlin\\' rhythm, verbally hit him
Did he did it, or did he didn\\'t, admit it -
Rugged Man - Give it Up
|
|
|
Biker Dude
A TRUE Liberal!
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +150/-114
Posts: 1,983
Live to Ride, Ride to Live
|
|
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2008, 08:28:58 PM » |
|
Good idea. Transmission drives cost up and efficiency down. However, there will always be a need for collective generation. I'm happy to hear about developments in both respects. One thing I've never understood is why more people don't make use of passive solar for heat. I understand that at the present, panels to generate electricity for a single house are expensive, but it's not so expensive for heat. Besides systems to heat water, I'm surprised that more houses don't have skylight windows. The fact that people aren't using the existing capabilities more than they are makes me question how eager they will be to use new technology. Of course, money talks, and if someone can make an inexpensive product that will allow homeowners to slash their utility bills, people will jump on it. Not only are transmission losses something we can do without, but the complexity of the distribution system is also. I don't know for sure why more people don't use passive. I think it has to do with cheap initial construction, and the desire for sameness that most new developments show. Your new HOA wants everything the same, and in order to keep initial costs down, you don't build with solar usage in mind. I know our local utility, which happens to be Xcel now (ugh), will give you breaks if you install alternative energy. Plus you can sell surplus back to them. Solar being the primary because in an urban environment a wind generator is tough. But even more increases in cell efficiencies and a reduction in cost will help with this. We are literally on the cutting edge, and our first production facility won't be open for a year and a half. Tracking the sun isn't that great of an obstacle. Computers can direct motors to keep optimal angles. Yes, it is easy, but it is costly. Which is why it is not optimal for individuals. It's interesting that you mention the maintenance issue though. I do some work for a wind developer, and I've been surprised at how much opposition there is to wind turbines. The low maintenance requirements of modern turbines is actually a liability to developers. One of the many gripes I hear about wind farms is that they don't bring enough jobs with them. Just up the road a major turbine producer just opened up a major factory. From planning to opening they scaled up by a factor of three due to demand. But I know that's not what you mean. An actual wind farm doesn't take many people. TBH, I'm curious what the objection will be when solar becomes economically feasible (it's impossible to generate power without pissing someone off). Think of all the blinded birds falling to earth from the glare. You keep those industrial solar generation facilities away from our ornithological society bird sanctuaries! NIMBY! Actual solar cells don't reflect, they absorb. Usually they are black, or dark gray. But this problem of NIMBY is yet another reason why we see on site generation as the way to go. From a business perspective, my thoughts are that cost of maintenance would be worth it compared to how much money could be made, and that this will prove more true with the passing of time.
We have found people that see it as making money. We are years away from turning a profit, but investors do not seem to be difficult to find. And they seem to be willing to take the long view. And to be honest, a job in a green company like this is a very good thing right now! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Who will watch the watchers?A vote for McCain is a traitorous vote for the destruction of our way of life as we know it.
|
|
|
|
