SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for takyon
All I want for Christmas is a 90% efficient solar panel
The idea of collecting energy from the sky – and using it in our homes to nurture, our schools to educate, our industry to build – is really the stuff of science fiction. As Arthur C Clarke once said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
NovaSolix proposes a carbon nanotube based solar module which has the theoretical potential to reach 90% efficiency. The technology is based on a 1960s invention – the rectifying antenna (rectenna) – which is today used in radio frequency identification (RFID) tags. RFID tags capture the radio waves put out by scanners and power themselves. NovaSolix aims to take that ability of converting a different portion (non-visible) of the electromagnetic spectrum, and – using carbon nanotubes tuned to the sun’s full spectrum output – collect a much broader portion of the energy in our environment.
NovaSolix isn’t first to come up with this idea. Dr. Brian Willis, of the University of Connecticut, was pushing toward this technique in 2013 when he was proclaimed for a fabrication process called selective area atomic layer deposition that could allow for the manufacturing of the carbon nanotubes. At the time, commenting on solar rectennas in general, Willis was quoted as saying, "I compare it to the days when televisions relied on rabbit ear antennas for reception. Everything was a static blur until you moved the antenna around and saw the ghost of an image. Then you kept moving it around until the image was clearer. That's what we're looking for, that ghost of an image."
When asked by pv magazine how NovaSolix was growing its carbon nanotubes (still a future idea in this author’s mind), Dr. Jyotsna Iyer first let me know that carbon nanotubes aren’t a future idea anymore They’ve been grown since the 1990s in a ‘serious fashion’. Paraphrasing a thought of hers, was that science fiction had long moved to science speculation, and under her supervision in the NovaSolix labs, into science manufacturing.
The company says they’ve demonstrated a proof of concept, in front of third parties, that has touched 43% efficiency. That’d suggest a 72 cell solar module near 860 watts, with a 90% solar cell pushing 1700 watts.
[...] NovaSolix’s path to market is much like many of the new solar technologies – start in industries that need a high efficiency product and can deal with the higher price while the company scales. Satellites and drones are two regulars on this list, and more recently cars have joined it.
Sono Motors suggests its car charge up just over 18 miles on a 24% efficient solar cell. If NovaSolix can get to that 90% number, that’s 67 miles of sunlight driving. The average daily miles driven in the USA is about 40 miles per person. Elon Musk – are you reading?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday November 27 2018, @04:59PM (20 children)
Absotutely!
Solar is free: if we can get even 80% it would be amazing.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Whoever on Tuesday November 27 2018, @05:16PM (19 children)
For many applications, higher efficiency isn't really very beneficial.
Higher efficiency translates to a smaller area of the installation. Many (but not all) installations are not constrained by available area.
The key issue for solar panels is cost. How much does it cost to install a kW of generation capacity? Lowering the cost of the panels and inverter is the most important improvement for most installations.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday November 27 2018, @05:24PM (11 children)
You are correct, but as efficiency goes up, so will adoption and costs SHOULD go down as long as 'they' don't allow a monopoly.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Informative) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:12PM (10 children)
I waited until costs dropped below 70c/watt. All I want is 10c/watt solar panels (currently at ~22c/watt). I don't even know the efficiency of my panels...I think around 14%.
@10c/watt, I could buy 8kw of panels, enough to keep a Phx house @18 all summer for $800
(Score: 2, Informative) by bob_super on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:19PM (9 children)
Are you conveniently forgetting the $20k of permit and licensed installer fees ?
The problem hasn't been the panels' raw cost for quite a while.
(Score: 2) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:59PM (1 child)
I set up in my backyard and not connected to any public grid, so permits are not required.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:32PM
That's not true where most Americans live. Significant structures, and electrical installations to primary dwellings, require permits.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:42PM (1 child)
If the efficiency can go up while costs go down, installer fees could become negligible (not hold back the installation from paying for itself quickly).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:55PM
More specialized installs might be an attractive point for industrial use - how many solar arrays take advantage of the thermal properties of solar panels for heating or cooling purposes? Generating energy while saving on other costs could make solar very attractive for some industries.
(Score: 4, Informative) by NewNic on Tuesday November 27 2018, @08:56PM (4 children)
Another bullshit, know-nothing post.
The whole system installed on my house cost less than $20k, including permits and installer fees. I am quite sure that the cost of the inverter and panels was more than zero.
If you live in CA, the state mandates an expedited permit process, and the resulting increase in home valuation is exempt from property taxes.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 27 2018, @09:59PM
Never underestimate the dedication of corporate shills. Or useful idiots, the only difference being money and some amount of ethics.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday November 27 2018, @11:18PM (2 children)
> installed on my house
And the quotes i got for mine were also less, but not much less, than $20k, for 3kW. My neighbor paid over $20k for 5 or 6 kW.
Yes, that includes everything.
But that mostly includes installer margins, because the raw components were definitely less than half of that.
If I rephrased as "$10k of permit and licensed installer fees, for a smallish installation", would you be happier ?
$20k for 10kW, does that strike you as bullshit, too ?
The point is that the installer points to the government rebates to pad the bill (and send its installers to carribean cruises one week per year, as my other neighbor gets from his company), and the utilities are happy to slow down the process, even in sunny liberal CA where last year I wasn't wasting enough power to be granted a 3kW permit.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Tuesday November 27 2018, @11:59PM (1 child)
What can I say except to give you real numbers? I paid about $18k (pre-tax credit pricing) for a 5.25kW system (maximum allowed based on my usage) and that included a free EVSE installation (supplied and fitted), which would have cost at least $1000 had I paid for it separately.
My neighbor is getting quotes of about $15k for a 4kW system. If you are being quoted nearly $20k for a 3kW system, you need to get more quotes.
Residential systems are a lot more expensive than large commercial systems on a cost per kW basis. That has always been true and always will be. If your system is too small it will never be cost-effective. But cost should not be the primary concern: time to pay back the cost is the real issue. I estimate 6 years for mine.
CA imposes a maximum permit fee of $500 plus $15/kW, so you are claiming that there are "licensed installer fees" of about $9.5k. What are these "licensed installer fees"? Are you talking about the labor costs to design and install a system?
Some quick googling suggests that a 300W panel currently costs about $300 - $400, and inverters are about $2000-$3000 so your proposed 3kW system would cost about $5000 to $7000 in retail hardware costs. So the installer who quoted you is charging somewhere around $13k for labor. Did you expect this to be free? Do you think it is artificially high (probably, yes).
You started at $20k and when challenged dropped it to $10k. That's quite a difference. Where did any of those numbers come from?
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday November 28 2018, @12:29AM
> Do you think it is artificially high (probably, yes).
Your own math points to 60% of the cost being installation, and the less you install, the higher the percentage gets.
That was my point. Cheap panels are not the problem here, where the "certified/licensed/bonded installer" is the majority of the cost.
The same Chinese panels get installed on European houses for half the US out-the-door price.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by opinionated_science on Tuesday November 27 2018, @05:30PM (5 children)
I suspect that efficiency in city locations is a very large part of the appeal here.
There is a considerable amount of roof space in dense urban environments, where panels are not easy to install (HOA's being part of the problem).
Never the less, anytime humanity finds a 90% efficient way of doing *anything*, there will be ideas that arise to exploit this.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:13PM
How many floors do you have under that roof, and how many AC units are already there ? How many hours a day is the roof in the sun, vs hidden by the taller building across the street ?
Suburban solar is a lot easier than downtown solar. Efficiency really matters there.
(Score: 2) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:19PM (2 children)
If you do the math, even a 10% efficient cell would supply 100% the energy for a year of an average house.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 27 2018, @08:11PM (1 child)
i have ONE ant in a hamster wheel powering my house. it's very space saving and very quiet.
the problem is the mountain of sugar and meth i have to feed it PER HOUR.
my point is that you can probably power anything with anything but ... the COST?
don't get me wrong, i am pro-solar having some myself but as long as "value" is tied to fossil fuel the real cost of solar will always be skewed.
consider that everything is "fossil" fuel powered. the production of solar cells, a lot of the logictics getting them solar panels from the "quartz" dune to the factory and then to the warehouse and the customer. also the human labour involved is dependent on oil. the food they eat whilst making and installing and driving around solar panels, was probably shipped half way around the world on a bunker oil container ship and involved a oil-consuming tractor somewhere along the way.
the trip to-and-from the factory (unless they already got a e-car). probably the (computer) payroll accounting for the solar worker is using electricity generated from fossil fuel.
so solar would be dirt cheap, i guess, if there were no "friction" (read: extra cost) because of oil and other fossil fuel "enablers"?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday November 28 2018, @05:35AM
How long does the solar panel last without replacement? Decades? If it lasts long enough, the fossil fuels and pollution that went into production could be negligible.
Newer solar panels may be flexible and capable of being stored in rolls. This could allow much more solar panel surface area to be stored in the volume of a shipping container or truck. Even if efficiency plummets, it could still reduce emissions.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday November 27 2018, @06:52PM
anytime humanity finds a 90% efficient way of doing *anything*, there will be ideas that arise to prevent this from happening.
Or erect a troll bridge.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by KilroySmith on Tuesday November 27 2018, @05:42PM
As long as you're only discussing use of the electricity by the site, then area and efficiency don't always matter. However, if a homeowner could power his home and inject the equivalent of two more homes worth of power back into the grid, you can meet all of an area's electrical needs for 5-6 hours a day.