New solar-panel technology 'more than oilsands': Researcher

[Azure]

EDMONTON - Twenty years from now, if roofs around the world are speckled with power-generating plastic solar panels, it may be thanks, at least in part, to a microscopic layer of Canadian technology sandwiched inside each one.
Researchers at the National Institute for Nanotechnology at the University of Alberta have developed a method that increases the efficiency in plastic photovoltaic cells by 30 per cent, a breakthrough they say may someday help make cheap, clean solar power available to the masses.

http://www2.canada.com/solar+panel+t...tml?id=1329186

What would the world do without us?

[Bertuzzied]

I think Encana and Suncor have found their next target. Get out the asian hitmen.

[psicodude]

Pretty cool, but doesn't a 30% jump in effeciency bring it from "Terrible" to "Sucky"?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Pretty cool, but doesn't a 30% jump in effeciency bring it from "Terrible" to "Sucky"?

Just makes it 30% better than what they used to have.

If you could increase the efficiency of coal 30%, would you?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Pretty cool, but doesn't a 30% jump in effeciency bring it from "Terrible" to "Sucky"?

But this innovation isn't about improving the performance of the best solar-panels out there; it's about making cheap plastic ones better; cost of manufacturing has always been the big prohibitor for solar panels. If you can get something that's dirt cheap and performs nearly as well as the silicon ones, it then becomes possible to put them on every roof; probably not enough to make most homes 'grid free', but enough to really take the load off the power system.

[Ford Prefect]

Not to be dismissive of this news, but researchers at MIT already came up with something that sounds pretty much the same, except the MIT guys boast a 50% increase in efficiency.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/s...ency-1126.html

"Using computer modeling and a variety of advanced chip-manufacturing techniques, they have applied an antireflection coating to the front, and a novel combination of multi-layered reflective coatings and a tightly spaced array of lines -- called a diffraction grating -- to the backs of ultrathin silicon films to boost the cells' output by as much as 50 percent."

Or is the stuff the guys in Edmonton developed news because it's cheaper and more suitable for mass marketing?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Not to be dismissive of this news, but researchers at MIT already came up with something that sounds pretty much the same, except the MIT guys boast a 50% increase in efficiency.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/s...ency-1126.html

"Using computer modeling and a variety of advanced chip-manufacturing techniques, they have applied an antireflection coating to the front, and a novel combination of multi-layered reflective coatings and a tightly spaced array of lines -- called a diffraction grating -- to the backs of ultrathin silicon films to boost the cells' output by as much as 50 percent."

Or is the stuff the guys in Edmonton developed news because it's cheaper and more suitable for mass marketing?

Yup, that's exactly it. The MIT guys are working with the high-end silicon ones, which there will always be a market for, especially if you want something that can generate enough power for an off the grid building. But if I'm looking for something to put on my garage roof to help offset the cost of running my power tools, something like the technology the Edmonton guys are working with is going to be a better fit.

[DESS]

Didn't read the article, but I doubt there's a future in the solar technology. I'm just not feeling it.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Azure

Just makes it 30% better than what they used to have.

If you could increase the efficiency of coal 30%, would you?

That might not be the best analogy. I think coal is in the 70% efficiency range right now; so increasing that by 30% would make take it from 70% efficient to 91% efficient.

Solar is in the 5% efficiency range now, so a 30% increase would bring it from 5% to 6.5% efficient.

I first read the article as saying they had achieved 30% efficiency, which for solar would be a huge leap.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by ken0042

That might not be the best analogy. I think coal is in the 70% efficiency range right now; so increasing that by 30% would make take it from 70% efficient to 91% efficient.

Solar is in the 5% efficiency range now, so a 30% increase would bring it from 5% to 6.5% efficient.

I first read the article as saying they had achieved 30% efficiency, which for solar would be a huge leap.

indeed, if someone hit 30% efficiency they're be on every roof before you know it.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by DESS

Didn't read the article, but I doubt there's a future in the solar technology. I'm just not feeling it.

Well there you go. Put away your clip boards, scientists.

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by DESS

Didn't read the article, but I doubt there's a future in the solar technology. I'm just not feeling it.

Well thanks for the informed contribution.


The thing about solar technology is, the more you improve the technology's efficiency, the faster you can recoup the installation costs and be getting 'free' energy. As soon as people/organizations don't need to amortize the cost over as long a period to fully recover the inital outlay, you will get more adopters, allowing for more market penetration, further inprovements and cost savings.

IMO, efficiency with respect to solar is misleading, it's not like you're 'wasting' a resource by using it up in an inefficient fashion.

[psicodude]

Yeah, I understand what you guys are saying, and I agree that even small advancements are still advancements. I guess I still have a problem with environmental technologies in general. The only way average Joe is going to use them, is if his investement pays for itself in a reasonable amount of time, and saves him cash at the end of the month.

Not trying to start a debate over the environment or anything, just saying this is the unfortunate truth.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Solar is in the 5% efficiency range now, so a 30% increase would bring it from 5% to 6.5% efficient.

The best solar panels are about 15-18% efficent right now. A 30% increase would take them to roughly 25%. Solar Technolgy is actually getting better in that regard.

See: http://www.wsetech.com/solarpanels.php

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by DESS

Didn't read the article, but I doubt there's a future in the solar technology. I'm just not feeling it.

Thanks, Colbert.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Good news!

Has anyone every tried to install solar panelling on their home in Calgary? I've heard Enmax kinda c*ckblocks you if you try.

[DESS]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Well there you go. Put away your clip boards, scientists.

lol I totally deserved that one. I like the way you put that.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by DESS

Didn't read the article, but I doubt there's a future in the solar technology. I'm just not feeling it.

I disagree. We'll get there. The largest source of energy in our solar system is just sitting up there blanketting the earth with 1kW/m^2 of free energy. The device to capture it (solar panel) is
a) reaching new efficiency levels over time
b) becoming cheaper to buy over time
c) its competition (electricity prices) are rising over time

All three of those trend in the same direction...to it becoming economically viable at some point.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

I think Encana and Suncor have found their next target. Get out the asian hitmen.

Oil and solar panels are not in competition with one another. Solar panels make electricity, oil is not used to make electricity.

It's the coal companies that are threatened by solar panels.

[simonsays]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Yeah, I understand what you guys are saying, and I agree that even small advancements are still advancements. I guess I still have a problem with environmental technologies in general. The only way average Joe is going to use them, is if his investement pays for itself in a reasonable amount of time, and saves him cash at the end of the month.

Not trying to start a debate over the environment or anything, just saying this is the unfortunate truth.

Absolutely, and the start-up costs on running individual houses on solar power are still sky high. Because even if you have an efficient (and cheap) enough solar panel you're still going to need to either store that energy in a battery or sell that energy to the grid. And having millions of mini-producers isn't something that our energy grids can handle at this point in time.

But this technology is a step in the right direction. Getting better efficiency out of plastics (rather than silica) is huge in that it massively drops the price of the panel itself.