4 ms·

this is great but its worth noting that efficiency isn't really what's holding solar production back, its price. few peoples roofs are crammed with PV to the po

this is great but its worth noting that efficiency isn't really what's holding solar production back, its price. few peoples roofs are crammed with PV to the point where they can't fit more in.

paul_f 13y ago
This is the fundamental problem with PV. Compared to cheap natural gas, there just isn't much future in it
- jussij 13y ago
  No Future? That might be true, except for that rather large elephant in the room call human-induced climate change.
  - diydsp 13y ago
    yes and PP presupposes "cheap natural gas." as witnessed by recent fracking-induced earthquakes [1] there may be very little cheap natural gas in the future. [1]http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942
  - tsotha 13y ago
    Pretty sure that was sarcasm.
- fauigerzigerk 13y ago
  I don't understand what you see as a fundamental problem with PV. Prices for panels are dropping like a stone and efficiency is increasing. What's the fundamental problem?
- frabcus 13y ago
  Price per watt of solar PV is on an exponentially improving trend line, since the late 1970s. http://cleantechnica.com/2013/05/24/solar-powers-massive-price-drop-graph/ http://cleantechnica.com/2013/05/24/solar-powers-massive-pri... Natural gas is, well, much less predictable. But hasn't gone below its 1990s price. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas
contingencies 13y ago
The picture is more complex than just price, as greater efficiency also means greater access to available light under suboptimal/changing conditions, which can make a difference to overall deployment feasibility.
dmazin 13y ago
That's true. This is exciting news for the solar panel research and industry world but not the world at large. This is a little like infinitesimally improving the efficiency of matrix manipulation. A giant leap for a microbe. However, this is indeed good progress and gives me hope we'll get to the apparently coveted 50% efficiency milestone.
jws 13y ago
Gains in efficiency can also be looked at as reductions in installation costs, for a given capacity. They can support a greater price premium than just the extra power would command.
- scythe 13y ago
  The cost of solar today is dominated not by panels, but by conversion and installation. Typical solar panels these days are about $0.80/watt, but installation hovers around $3/watt. The former is competitive with fossil fuels; the latter is not. So the efficiency gain is actually very good, because current panels are on average 14% (iirc) efficient. If that can be raised to 42% the installation drops to $1, for example; with a few more gains here and there you're golden. The difficulty is in manufacturing these things; thin films are easy, this is not.
  - twelvechairs 13y ago
    where are these figures from? seems incredible for installation to be substantially more than the panels in my rxperience. unless 'installation' is including the price of other fixed components (batteries and inverter). Also 1/3 size does not mean 1/3 installation costs. lots of the underlying figures don't change (truck call out, overhead, installation of other elements, cost of permits, electrical wiring, etc).
    - jules 13y ago
      The point is that you still install the same amount of panels, but now you get three times as many watts. Since the other underlying figures don't change, the installation cost is 1/3 per watt.
    - scythe 13y ago
      It's a rather common thread, I'm having a bit of trouble finding an authoritative source but let's look around: http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/solar.html http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/solar.html >Incidentally, naked solar panels currently (2013) go for about $1 per watt ($1000 per kWp), installation costs are about $4 per watt, for a total installed cost of about $5 per watt, without batteries. http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2012/11/27/the-installed-price-of-solar-photovoltaic-systems-in-the-u-s-continues-to-decline-at-a-rapid-pace/ http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2012/11/27/the-insta... >average non-module costs for residential and commercial systems declined by roughly 30 percent from 1998 to 2011, but have not declined as rapidly as module prices in recent years. As a result, non-module costs now represent a sizable fraction of the installed price of PV systems >the median installed price of PV systems installed in 2011 was $6.10 per watt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel#Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel#Price >in 2012 it was estimated that the quantity cost per watt was about $0.60 http://www.wholesalesolar.com/bulk-solar-panels-by-the-pallet.html http://www.wholesalesolar.com/bulk-solar-panels-by-the-palle... >Price per watt: $0.84 So if anything, I might be lowballing it. I was thinking in terms of tripling wattage for the same amount of effort, (which makes sense for commercial PV) rather than thirding effort for the same wattage (which makes more sense at home), so your secondary point is valid. If at-home PV takes off, it might be a good time to be an electrician.
nether 13y ago
In the major solar car races, there's a category for cars built with a mandated type of midrange cost solar cell. That way it's not just about who can afford the best cells.

this is great but its worth noting that efficiency isn't really what's holding solar production back, its price. few peoples roofs are crammed with PV to the point where they can't fit more in.

paul_f 13y ago

This is the fundamental problem with PV. Compared to cheap natural gas, there just isn't much future in it

jussij 13y ago
No Future? That might be true, except for that rather large elephant in the room call human-induced climate change.
- diydsp 13y ago
  yes and PP presupposes "cheap natural gas." as witnessed by recent fracking-induced earthquakes [1] there may be very little cheap natural gas in the future. [1]http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942
- tsotha 13y ago
  Pretty sure that was sarcasm.
fauigerzigerk 13y ago
I don't understand what you see as a fundamental problem with PV. Prices for panels are dropping like a stone and efficiency is increasing. What's the fundamental problem?
frabcus 13y ago
Price per watt of solar PV is on an exponentially improving trend line, since the late 1970s. http://cleantechnica.com/2013/05/24/solar-powers-massive-price-drop-graph/ http://cleantechnica.com/2013/05/24/solar-powers-massive-pri... Natural gas is, well, much less predictable. But hasn't gone below its 1990s price. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas

contingencies 13y ago

The picture is more complex than just price, as greater efficiency also means greater access to available light under suboptimal/changing conditions, which can make a difference to overall deployment feasibility.

dmazin 13y ago

That's true. This is exciting news for the solar panel research and industry world but not the world at large. This is a little like infinitesimally improving the efficiency of matrix manipulation. A giant leap for a microbe. However, this is indeed good progress and gives me hope we'll get to the apparently coveted 50% efficiency milestone.

jws 13y ago

Gains in efficiency can also be looked at as reductions in installation costs, for a given capacity. They can support a greater price premium than just the extra power would command.

scythe 13y ago
The cost of solar today is dominated not by panels, but by conversion and installation. Typical solar panels these days are about $0.80/watt, but installation hovers around $3/watt. The former is competitive with fossil fuels; the latter is not. So the efficiency gain is actually very good, because current panels are on average 14% (iirc) efficient. If that can be raised to 42% the installation drops to $1, for example; with a few more gains here and there you're golden. The difficulty is in manufacturing these things; thin films are easy, this is not.
- twelvechairs 13y ago
  where are these figures from? seems incredible for installation to be substantially more than the panels in my rxperience. unless 'installation' is including the price of other fixed components (batteries and inverter). Also 1/3 size does not mean 1/3 installation costs. lots of the underlying figures don't change (truck call out, overhead, installation of other elements, cost of permits, electrical wiring, etc).
  - jules 13y ago
    The point is that you still install the same amount of panels, but now you get three times as many watts. Since the other underlying figures don't change, the installation cost is 1/3 per watt.
  - scythe 13y ago
    It's a rather common thread, I'm having a bit of trouble finding an authoritative source but let's look around: http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/solar.html http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/solar.html >Incidentally, naked solar panels currently (2013) go for about $1 per watt ($1000 per kWp), installation costs are about $4 per watt, for a total installed cost of about $5 per watt, without batteries. http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2012/11/27/the-installed-price-of-solar-photovoltaic-systems-in-the-u-s-continues-to-decline-at-a-rapid-pace/ http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2012/11/27/the-insta... >average non-module costs for residential and commercial systems declined by roughly 30 percent from 1998 to 2011, but have not declined as rapidly as module prices in recent years. As a result, non-module costs now represent a sizable fraction of the installed price of PV systems >the median installed price of PV systems installed in 2011 was $6.10 per watt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel#Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel#Price >in 2012 it was estimated that the quantity cost per watt was about $0.60 http://www.wholesalesolar.com/bulk-solar-panels-by-the-pallet.html http://www.wholesalesolar.com/bulk-solar-panels-by-the-palle... >Price per watt: $0.84 So if anything, I might be lowballing it. I was thinking in terms of tripling wattage for the same amount of effort, (which makes sense for commercial PV) rather than thirding effort for the same wattage (which makes more sense at home), so your secondary point is valid. If at-home PV takes off, it might be a good time to be an electrician.

nether 13y ago

In the major solar car races, there's a category for cars built with a mandated type of midrange cost solar cell. That way it's not just about who can afford the best cells.