31–40 of 112 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like solar fences: https://next2sun.com/en/solar-fence/
Solar panels are already cheaper than wood, which is amazing.
Here is the graph of exponential installed solar capacity [1]. Like Moore’s law, continuous technological innovation and investment will be required to keep the pace. We just hit 1 terawatt— and doubling time seems to be about every 3 years. So… 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,512,1028, 2056 terawatts in 30 years? With 20% capacity, that’s equivalent to >300,000 Million Tons of Oil (MToE) per year. Current global energy consump…
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
I've been waiting for consumer level panels to get cheaper forever. You'd think by now that you could get a 200W panel for $50. But they have been the same $200 for what seems like a decade now (I suppose they didn't go up with inflation, but still)
That's ballpark where you say, about $65/200W.
They also have remanufactured panels, like the 410W trina ones, even cheaper. Good outfit, nice and helpful, bought several lots of panels off of them.
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
That and government incentive programs for home energy efficiency seems to have just inflated prices and stimulated demand to make the installation costs worse. Quotes I've gotten on heat pumps for example have been ridiculous, and solar much the same.
Hate to say it, but a recession might be what "fixes" this. Not that I want to deprive trades people of a good livelihood, but it feels like the end consumer is getting screwed right now.
As an outsider, what's the appeal of PeSC? The paper says they are less efficient and harder to manufacture, but also that they are the "next generation". I would have thought the next generation would be more efficient or easier to manufacture or both.
"Harder to manufacture" is relative. The hope is that they would be easier, because they're not monocrystalline and don't require the high energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czochralski_method to produce a semiconductor substrate. The paper (and the general "pitch" of perovskites) plans to use roll-to-roll printing on flexible substrates.
It's encouraging to see progress but where perovskite thin films show potential is in an integrated mechanical stack application with silicon, where they can supplement each other's barely-double-digit efficiencies focusing on different parts of the spectrum to combine to reach something on par with traditional crystalline silicon, but thinner and with lower production costs.
Seeing thin film beat crystalline silicon is like seeing nuclear fusion become cost-effective. It's perpetually 10 years away, and has been since the 70's.
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
For example: buy panels so cheap you just leave them on the ground. If they get damaged who cares. Some people are already using them as material for fences. Not a great angle, they’re cheap who cares.
The market need for cheaper solar cells seems to have evaporated, since the vast majority of the cost of solar projects these days is always in labour/land/wiring/inverters/grid connection/maintenance contracts. That means saving a bit of money on the panels in return for lower efficiency is never a good deal.
I've been waiting for consumer level panels to get cheaper forever. You'd think by now that you could get a 200W panel for $50. But they have been the same $200 for what seems like a decade now (I suppose they didn't go up with inflation, but still)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Solar panels are already cheaper than wood, which is amazing.
Where are PV panels cheaper than wood? A 4x8 sheet of plywood runs about 40$ in north America, and roughly double that in Europe. I don't see PV panels anywhere near that price.