5 ms·

The current efficiency record for research panels is around 44.7% [1] but commercial companies are above 22% (Sanyo, Panasonic, etc) [2] [1] https://renooble.

The current efficiency record for research panels is around 44.7% [1] but commercial companies are above 22% (Sanyo, Panasonic, etc) [2] [1] https://renooble.com/blog/2013/11/solar-panel-efficiency-new-world-record/ https://renooble.com/blog/2013/11/solar-panel-efficiency-new... [2] https://renooble.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/nrel_efficiency_chart.jpg https://renooble.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/nrel_ef...

dredmorbius 12y ago
Greater efficiency comes with higher costs. The maximum theoretical efficiency of solar panels is about 85% of incident sunlight based on the physics of the photoelectric effect. I've been learning about efficiency and cost, and was told recently that many large-scale installations in unsecured location use 9% efficient thin-film technology simply due to cost. Having your 20%-40% high-value panels stolen doesn't net you benefit. And you're still working against other constraints: a maximum insolation at Earth's surface of around 1 kW/m^2, the local insolation rate (great tool from NREL for mapping that within the US: http://maps.nrel.gov/prospector http://maps.nrel.gov/prospector), panel spacing (you net about 55% area fill rate at 36 degrees latitude based on panel angle and avoiding overlap), inverter efficiency (about 90%), capacity factor (amount of time you're receiving full sunlight), and more. By the time you account for all of this, you're down to about 30W of that 1 kW you can actually deliver (time-averaged -- peak is closer to 97W). And if you want to allow for storage, you've got even more losses. Plants start looking pretty effective at 1-3% solar conversion rates, especially when you figure they build themselves at the same time. More on net solar potential: http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/28cvgv/calculating_estimated_solar_energy_potential/ http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/28cvgv/calculat...

dredmorbius 12y ago

Greater efficiency comes with higher costs. The maximum theoretical efficiency of solar panels is about 85% of incident sunlight based on the physics of the photoelectric effect. I've been learning about efficiency and cost, and was told recently that many large-scale installations in unsecured location use 9% efficient thin-film technology simply due to cost. Having your 20%-40% high-value panels stolen doesn't net you benefit. And you're still working against other constraints: a maximum insolation at Earth's surface of around 1 kW/m^2, the local insolation rate (great tool from NREL for mapping that within the US: http://maps.nrel.gov/prospector http://maps.nrel.gov/prospector), panel spacing (you net about 55% area fill rate at 36 degrees latitude based on panel angle and avoiding overlap), inverter efficiency (about 90%), capacity factor (amount of time you're receiving full sunlight), and more. By the time you account for all of this, you're down to about 30W of that 1 kW you can actually deliver (time-averaged -- peak is closer to 97W). And if you want to allow for storage, you've got even more losses. Plants start looking pretty effective at 1-3% solar conversion rates, especially when you figure they build themselves at the same time. More on net solar potential: http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/28cvgv/calculating_estimated_solar_energy_potential/ http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/28cvgv/calculat...