3 ms·
17%
by dvh 8y ago
17%
- mikeyouse 8y agoAnd on one of my favorite charts, that red triangle at the very bottom is about to jump substantially up the Y-axis: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/PVeff%28rev180716%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/PVeff%28...
- acchow 8y agoFTA: "Commercial solar photovoltaics usually covert 15-22% of sunlight, with a world record of 26.6% reached in Japan in 2016." And yet your linked chart shows datapoints >40%. What gives?
- joshuahaglund 8y agoThe article isn't very good is what.
- hcknwscommenter 8y agoNo. The >40% are "exotic" in some fashion and very expensive compared to what is commercially available. Think of "hero" cells where the best cell from an entire production run is tested or a cell is produced using techniques that are incompatible with mass production. Now, add in tandem (multijunction) on top of that, and you get to >40%.
- ksec 8y agomultijunctiion.
- jabl 8y agoWell, isn't this new device essentially a multijunction organic solar cell? That's what I gathered from the BBC article. I guess the hope is that they will command less of a relative premium compared to multijunction silicon cells?
- Brakenshire 8y agoInorganic multijunction devices are very difficult and costly to make, because the materials have to be evaporated into place. Organics in principle can be printed using standard solvents.
- innocentfelon 8y agoLet’s not forget that many thin-film amorphous silicon devices use multiple junctions as well.
- Areading314 8y agoCommercial solar photovoltaics typically refer to "standard" silicon solar cells which have efficiency around the 15-22% range. The 40% cells in the graphic are for materials systems that are much too expensive to be commercially viable.
- mikeyouse 8y agoYep, the very high efficiency cells are typically reserved for highly specialized areas where cost doesn’t matter.. You’ll see Boeing’s name a lot near the top of the efficiency list for the exotic cell types, their lab’s website should clue everyone in to what their main purpose is: https://www.spectrolab.com https://www.spectrolab.com They list 31% efficiencies for their cells that can fly today which must be near the limit of commercialization / certification. Still pretty good though, that’s 50% more efficient than a standard panel, and at several $10s of thousands per kg into space, clearly worth it!
- pvarangot 8y ago28/30% cells are common in spacecraft and have been for more than five years, but they are expensive. A little less than 10k for something like 1 square meter only for the cells wouldn't be crazy.
- mikeyouse 8y agoIt looks like Boeing's latest multijunction line ships at 30.7% efficient: https://www.spectrolab.com/photovoltaics.html#cells_cics https://www.spectrolab.com/photovoltaics.html#cells_cics Which seems about right, but what I didn't realize is that they're shipping >40% concentrators too. That's pretty great! https://www.spectrolab.com/photovoltaics.html#cells_cics https://www.spectrolab.com/photovoltaics.html#cells_cics (That last link was supposed to be for the concentrator section at the bottom of that page, but I don't think it's a normal # bookmark)
- hedvig 8y agoThese cells should be available for everyone and not just the 1%.
- hevi_jos 8y agoThis is what NASA could get to power their satellites, at NASA's pricepoint. Commercial means what you can buy at reasonable prices. It takes some time from knowing something is possible, experimental technology, like multitouch controlled computers, and companies selling them in the billions, like multitouch being in every Ipad or smartphone.