4 ms·

It's the right mindset. Cheap panels that can be mass manufactured and installed in places where there is plenty of room to do that are a great way to deliverin

It's the right mindset. Cheap panels that can be mass manufactured and installed in places where there is plenty of room to do that are a great way to delivering lots of power cheaply. The economic efficiency of the panels is function of how many square meters they take, how expensive those square meters are, how costly it is to maintain and service the setup, how long they last, and how expensive it is to buy and install them, etc. It's not just about the watt/square meter. Less moving parts means less complexity, less things that can break, and overall lower cost. 10% more power at 2x the cost is a net negative.

smolder 4y ago
There are probably applications where 10% more power at 2x the cost make sense, like on a satellite or a solar powered aircraft, maybe.
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  How much more mass, though? Mass is likely to be at a premium anywhere you can't just also slap down a few more cheap cells, e.g. where there's not much space.
  - smolder 4y ago
    Good points by you and your sibling poster. Maybe this tech really would have a hard time finding a niche when considering mass along with cost/performance characteristics, given other premium or economic options. Maybe on the roof of an expensive high rise it would make sense? On boats? Hard to say.
- gumby 4y ago
  Indeed, though there are other places of the design space to look. For example in satellites, triple junction cells (generating power from additional parts of the spectrum) are worth the much higher cost as they weigh the same as standard cells, thus generating more power without increasing launch cost.
Retric 4y ago
In terms of total kWh per year cheap panels win. In terms of the value per year morning and evening power is becoming increasingly valuable due to the duck curve. Tracking solar panels still aren’t viable, but large instillations will sometimes aim a percentage of panels to the east or west to shift power at the cost of total kWh per year maximize value produced. So, 20% more cost for 10% more power could be worth it even outside of space constrained applications.
- hedora 4y ago
  Cheap panels’ output drops as temperature goes up. I hadn’t thought of it until just now, but that should flatten the duck curve. Another way to flatten the duck curve is to buy smaller inverters and more panels.
- scblock 4y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your statement that tracking solar panels aren't viable. The vast majority of utility scale solar PV installations in the United States use single axis tracking systems. These orient the modules on a north south axis, which then tilts from east to west throughout the day. Energy capture over an equivalent optimized fixed-tilt system is significant. The land area required is larger, however. Most smaller or behind the meter systems such as carports or rooftop mount solar use fixed tilt, and fixed tilt is also used in certain types of terrain or where costs for tracking are prohibitive.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Retric 4y ago
    Yes single axis tracking are common, but dual axis racking isn’t. Horizontal Single-Axis Solar Tracker’s are normally aligned north south, but shifting slightly off axis from pure north vs south can increase output in the morning or evening. Tilted Single-Axis Solar Tracker’s are closer to the performance of dual Axis trackers, but have a similar question do you pick a tilt angle to maximize annual, summer, or winter output.
- 4y ago

smolder 4y ago

There are probably applications where 10% more power at 2x the cost make sense, like on a satellite or a solar powered aircraft, maybe.

andrewflnr 4y ago
How much more mass, though? Mass is likely to be at a premium anywhere you can't just also slap down a few more cheap cells, e.g. where there's not much space.
- smolder 4y ago
  Good points by you and your sibling poster. Maybe this tech really would have a hard time finding a niche when considering mass along with cost/performance characteristics, given other premium or economic options. Maybe on the roof of an expensive high rise it would make sense? On boats? Hard to say.
gumby 4y ago
Indeed, though there are other places of the design space to look. For example in satellites, triple junction cells (generating power from additional parts of the spectrum) are worth the much higher cost as they weigh the same as standard cells, thus generating more power without increasing launch cost.

Retric 4y ago

In terms of total kWh per year cheap panels win. In terms of the value per year morning and evening power is becoming increasingly valuable due to the duck curve. Tracking solar panels still aren’t viable, but large instillations will sometimes aim a percentage of panels to the east or west to shift power at the cost of total kWh per year maximize value produced. So, 20% more cost for 10% more power could be worth it even outside of space constrained applications.

hedora 4y ago
Cheap panels’ output drops as temperature goes up. I hadn’t thought of it until just now, but that should flatten the duck curve. Another way to flatten the duck curve is to buy smaller inverters and more panels.
scblock 4y ago
I'm not sure I understand your statement that tracking solar panels aren't viable. The vast majority of utility scale solar PV installations in the United States use single axis tracking systems. These orient the modules on a north south axis, which then tilts from east to west throughout the day. Energy capture over an equivalent optimized fixed-tilt system is significant. The land area required is larger, however. Most smaller or behind the meter systems such as carports or rooftop mount solar use fixed tilt, and fixed tilt is also used in certain types of terrain or where costs for tracking are prohibitive.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Retric 4y ago
  Yes single axis tracking are common, but dual axis racking isn’t. Horizontal Single-Axis Solar Tracker’s are normally aligned north south, but shifting slightly off axis from pure north vs south can increase output in the morning or evening. Tilted Single-Axis Solar Tracker’s are closer to the performance of dual Axis trackers, but have a similar question do you pick a tilt angle to maximize annual, summer, or winter output.
4y ago