# Solar: IF Real



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

First I don't believe it's real, but if so
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/genera...aper-more-efficient-scientists-155729864.html

The claim is 1/2 the cost. Ok so the current cost is about $2.00 a watt total system cost ( less on big systems, more on little ones) and if you had to finance a system it costs about $.18 a kilowatt hour now ( again less for bigger systems) and that is equal to or better then some utilities in some states. Now 50% cheaper panels is a part of the system and likely reduces the overall cost 20-25%. That could mean financed solar power drops to $.135 a kilowatt he.....BUT wait there is more.....40% more efficiency means more power (which you wouldn't buy) so it really means 40% less panels purchases....that could ...could make solar possible at $.09 a kilowatt hour !!!! WOW that would be a winner in about 70% of the states.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

Considering that current solar cells are only 18% effective, it doesn't surprise me that the next step could be big. 

What will be interesting is if this technology was made possible by the $10 billion GW funded during his presidency. So he was portrayed as the oil baron, he spent more on alternative fuels than the current administration. 

It would be really great if we had solar cells so effective that we didn;t need foreign oil anymore. Or our own.


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

Electric cars are fine, but not if we need to burn coal to fuel them. This would be a game changer....


----------



## HuntingHawk (Dec 16, 2012)

Stuff like this comes up once a year. There have been developments to increase efficiency but the increase in cost in production has never justified.


----------



## HuntingHawk (Dec 16, 2012)

Ripon said:


> Electric cars are fine, but not if we need to burn coal to fuel them. This would be a game changer....


There is an older couple not so far from me that has a 48V electric golf cart which is directly charged from a 48V solar system. In my county, electric carts are allowed on roads of posted speeds of up to 35MPH. They just use it for visiting neighbors, checking mail (about 1 mile road trip), & trash to the dumpster.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Solar and wind require increased efficencies and lower intial costs to compete with fossil fuels on an economic level. Great news if true. If they could make cheap battery cells that would last....


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

It seems to be an interesting technology. Since these lead based perovskite cells absorb different wavelengths than silicon-based cells, there is even talk about combining the two to produce cells that could near 40% in conversion efficiency. Certainly a game changer if they pull it off.

Thanks for the link Ripon, it's something I'll be keeping my eye on.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

Down here in AZ we are seeing solar popping up everywhere. Grocery stores, schools, the local military base installed a solar farm. I am glad to se it. It always bothered me that of all the places in America, sunny states like AZ & NV should be ashamed of ourselves for being so damned latent on joining the game. We have energy literally falling from the sky in carcogenic levels, and yet we ignored it for years.

But Ripon's last post about burning coal to power electric cars was spot-on. Even with solar cells or hydrogen-based energy, there is always the industrial downside to consider. Namely, does it take more energy and resources to create the device than it woulda if we just used fossil fuels? Prolly the big reason that many states were hesitant about solar for so long was that it was not really very good tecnology during the early years, nd very expensive. When cells were only 5 or 10% effective they were not worth the effort of manufacturing them. Same goes for hydrogen, at current energy costs it is cheaper to just burn fossil fuels than to split salt water into hydrogen. The energy recovered at the end of the process amounts to a net loss.

But what if the energy were free, or nearly so? I have considered the idea of using inexpensive solar to split water, then use hydrogen to run a generator or power a car. It removes batteries from the component, but adds the difficulty of pressurized hydrogen. I think we're still a few years away from tht yet level of efficiency, but it is interesting to think that you could drive down the road knowing that you are emitting no hazardous chemicals or pollutants. The only thing coming out of your tailpipe is water vapor.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

While the price of panels has dropped to about $1 a watt the price of the grid tie inverters and the additional NEC required equipment is very high.


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

Technology will make it better and by that I mean inverters and batteries to. Sadly it's govt and building permits that are ruining it.


----------



## HuntingHawk (Dec 16, 2012)

What is built in a lab has little to do with the real world.

40% increase in a lab is ideal conditions. That translates to less then 20% in the real world.

I remember several years ago a guy came up with a 15% increase just by the type of glass used. Never produced because even a hard rain would break the glass.

Even a 10% increase would be nice but not if it cost 30% more to produce it.


----------

