PDA

View Full Version : Lets talk PV Solar. Residential Alternative Energy



Sev
04-05-2011, 01:53 PM
As a contractor I have been looking into this for several years. Many states and the fed have offered and are still offering incentives for the home owner to have some sort of PV Solor system installed on their homes if the residence is orintated in the proper direction an receives the minimal amount of sunlight to to generate the proper amount of electricity.

Currently there are 2 types of PV availiable to the public. The first it crystalline based and the second is thin film based or PV laminates.

Is solar cost effective by the Watt? Now that is debatable. Thin layer laminates are only efficient up to about 19% They are typically 7% more expensive then the crystalline based panels.
Crystalline panels can be up to 26% efficient. However this is mostly due to tracking which most residential installations do not have nor are justified due to expense.

As far as costs go before incentives you are looking at shelling out about 9.00 a watt for the installation. Or 9000.00 per Kw. So if you want a 5 KW installation you are looking at $45,000.00 prior to incentives. That is with no batter back up. Add $7,500.00 in batters to capture the peak hours of the afternoon.

Now the value of the energy it produces per Kw per year is about $115.00 so you would in essence be producing $575.00 in energy per year.

Now there are several problems with thin film panels as well as crystalline. The thin film ones tend to degrade rapidly especially if they are exposed to moisture. The crystalline ones degrade as well but slower. Due to degradation their efficiency drops rapidly.
The serviceable time period currently for panels is between 10 and 25 years. Its a pretty large investment for a short term run.

Batteries are another problem. 2-5 years is the shelf life. Although strides are being made in the area of lithium Ion storage packs as well as others.

I have been finding all this quite interesting as I have looked into solar.
Now if you take into account all the incentives it is about a 40 percent reduction in cost.
Keep in mind the overall cost of the Solar system will vary from state to state.

Now one advantage on not having batteries is that you can link directly to the grid and sell the excess energy to the power authority for green tags.

What most people seem to miss is that commercial solar due to its size is far cheaper to install than residential systems. The solar itself is actually not the most expensive part of the system. Its all the rest of the parts such as the inverter and the actual installation itself.

Now for those of you that dont know. The solar thin film goes right onto Standing seam roofing material. Atas is one company that produces it. As far as metal roofing goes this company tends to be on the expensive side.

Also another innovation is what is called pv solar slates. They are cement based slate style shingles impregnated with solar cells.
Another alternative is a asphalt based shingle that is impregnated with solar cells.

These last two tend to be less efficient.
Also on the last I was discussing the installation of them and inquired how I would replace a panel in the middle of the roof if it went dead, without damaging the surrounding shingles with either my ladder, brackets or feet.
I was told by the rep that they didnt know.


Now there have been recent developments in this field. Most notably in the area of Quantum Dot tech.

Sev
04-05-2011, 01:55 PM
This is where the rubber hits the road. Currently this tech produces 61% efficiency vs the 18-24% of other technology.

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/37248/?p1=A3&a=f
<span style="color: #000000">
Quantum Dots as Solar Cells

N-type and p-type semiconductor nanocrystals could pave the way for new types of solar cells.

The key to using silicon in electronic devices such as transistors and solar cells lies in doping, or adding in small quantities of other elements, to create an excess of electrons (n-type) or positively charged holes (p-type) that change the material's conductivity. N-type and p-type silicon are butted together to form p-n junctions, the basic building blocks of electronic devices such as solar cells, light-emitting diodes, and transistors.

For years, researchers have tried to do something similar with quantum dots, tiny semiconductor crystals a few nanometers in diameter. Now, a team of Israeli researchers has reported success. They have doped indium arsenide quantum dots to create n-type and p-type materials. The advance, published in the journal Science, could lead to new types of efficient, cheap, and printable thin-film solar cells.

Quantum dots hold promise for low-cost solar cells because they can be made using simple, inexpensive chemical reactions. Scientists have calculated that quantum dots could be used to make thin-film photovoltaics that are at least as efficient as conventional silicon cells, and possibly more efficient. The higher possible efficiency is because nanocrystals made of certain semiconductors can emit more than one electron for every photon absorbed. Plus, tweaking their size and shape changes the colors of light they absorb. "We could tune the nanocrystal absorption to match the solar spectrum," says Uri Banin, a professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who led the new work.

Despite these advantages, no one has succeeded in making efficient quantum-dot solar cells. For that, you need n-type and p-type nanocrystals, says Eran Rabani, a chemistry professor at Tel Aviv University who was involved in the new work. In solar cells, the electrons and holes that are created when photons are absorbed have to be separated so that the electrons can travel out of the semiconductor to the external electric circuit. Some electrons and holes inevitably combine, but they combine much faster in quantum dots than in large silicon crystals. Doping semiconductor nanocrystals would provide a way for creating p-n junctions that separate electrons and holes efficiently, Rabani says.
Advertisement

Silicon is typically doped with phosphorus or boron atoms, but these materials do not work with quantum dots because the dots are so small. A 4-nanometer-wide nanocrystal contains about 1,000 atoms. Adding a few dopant atoms .can lead to their being expelled from the nanocrystals.

Some quantum-dot doping efforts have succeeded. Researchers have, for instance, doped them with magnetic manganese ions, but this technique does not introduce excess electrons or holes. Others have been able to make undoped nanocrystals n-type by injecting electrons into them. Still others have been able to dope thin films of nanocrystals.

The Israeli team, by contrast, is able to dope freestanding nanoparticles. "This is a major breakthrough here," says Y. Charles Cao, a chemistry professor at the University of Florida in Gainesville. "The major advantage here is you [have] the building blocks for the bottom-up assembly of nanocrystal electronic devices." Another plus, adds Cao, is that the method used to make the dots is easy and inexpensive and could be scaled up to make devices in large quantities.

Banin and his colleagues start with a solution of silver or copper compounds and gradually add it to a solution of indium arsenide nanocrystals. This results in silver-doped p-type dots or copper-doped n-type ones. Since the quantum dots are made in solution, they could be deposited on flexible plastic sheets using printers or roll-to-roll processes.
</span>

Sev
04-05-2011, 01:59 PM
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/32234/page1/

<span style="color: #000000"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Capturing More Light with a Single Solar Cell</span>

A semiconductor material could make solar cells three times as efficient.

* Monday, January 31, 2011
* By Kevin Bullis


The most efficient solar cells typically have several layers of semiconductor materials, each tuned to convert different colors of light into electricity. Researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab have now made a single semiconductor that performs almost the same job. More importantly, they made the material using a common manufacturing technique, suggesting it could be made relatively inexpensively.

Several research groups are developing semiconductor materials that harness more of the energy in sunlight, based on an idea that dates back to 1960 for changing how semiconductor materials in solar cells interact with light. But the materials used in that research tend to be very difficult to make.

Much work remains before the Lawrence Berkeley lab material could be used in a practical solar cell, but in theory it could convert nearly half of the energy in sunlight into electricity—three times as much as most single-layer (or single-junction) solar cells. Such a solar cell could also cost less than the layered (or multi-junction) solar cells currently needed to achieve high efficiencies, since it would require only one semiconductor material.

In a conventional semiconductor material, it takes a certain amount of energy to free an electron and generate electricity. Photons that have less energy—say, the photons in infrared light—don't generate electricity. And if a photon has more than the minimum—for instance a photon in energetic ultraviolet light—the extra energy is wasted as heat.
Advertisement

<span style="color: #660000">The new semiconductor material is based on gallium arsenide. Normally, this material requires high-energy photons to generate electricity. But the researchers modified it so that the energy from more than one photon is used to free an electron—energy adds up until an electron is freed. Replacing some of the arsenic atoms in the material with nitrogen atoms creates regions that act as stepping stones for electrons that have absorbed some energy from low-energy photons, where they can wait to receive energy from more photons, says Wladek Walukiewicz, who leads the Solar Energy Materials Research Group at the Lawrence Berkeley lab, and also led the project.
</span>
The new material converts high-energy photons into electricity without wasting their energy as heat, and also converts low-energy photons to electricity—photons that ordinarily wouldn't be absorbed by the material.

A similar effect is achieved in commercial multi-junction solar cells, which are made by essentially stacking three solar cells on top of each other, each optimized for a different color of light. But combining these three solar cells is expensive and complex, since each layer has to be closely matched to the other layers.

The prototype solar cell is still relatively inefficient. Part of the problem is that many of the electrons that have absorbed some energy from low-energy photons don't hold onto that energy for long enough to absorb energy from another photon. These electrons never make it out of material, and the energy is lost as heat. The researchers are working with two companies, Rose Street Labs Energy and Sumika Electronic Materials, to overcome this issue. One option, for example, is doping the material with phosphorous atoms to change their electrical properties.

That will be challenging, says Andrew Norman, a research scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Norman has also worked on this type of solar cell, although one made from very different materials. Norman says the new work is interesting, particularly because of the high voltage levels that the cell produces, but he notes that it has proved difficult to commercialize this type of cell. "You have to wonder why, in 50 years, no one has been successful," he says. </span>

Sev
04-05-2011, 02:02 PM
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/32425/page2/
<span style="color: #000000">
New Materials Make Photovoltaics Better

A startup says it can beat the performance of the most efficient solar cells on the market today.

* Wednesday, February 23, 2011
* By Kevin Bullis


A startup called Solar Junction says its pilot manufacturing plant is producing solar cells units that are more efficient than the best ones on the market today. The advance, based on new semiconductor materials that the company has developed, could help make a type of solar power system called concentrated photovoltaics a far more attractive way to generate electricity from the sun.

Concentrated photovoltaic systems account for a small fraction of total solar power today—with only several megawatts of production capacity installed, compared to many gigawatts of capacity for conventional solar panels. They're limited to very sunny areas, where they compete with solar thermal, the cheapest form of solar power today, which uses mirrors to concentrate sunlight for the purpose of generating steam for steam turbines. Advances in solar cell efficiency have only recently made concentrated photovoltaic systems economical in some areas.

Craig Stauffer, cofounder of Solar Junction, based in San Jose, California, says his company's new cells could bring the price of solar power to below 10 cents per kilowatt hour, compared to 16.5 cents per kilowatt hour or more for typical solar panels. Solar Junction's cells require fewer layers than many other ultra-efficient solar cells and are better matched to the solar spectrum.

Solar Junction's cells are designed for photovoltaic systems that use mirrors or lenses to concentrate sunlight 1,000 times. Concentrating sunlight improves the efficiency of most solar cells, but solar cells designed for use under such high concentrations—called multi-junction cells--do particularly well because they incorporate two or three semiconductor layers for absorbing different colors of sunlight, rather than the single semiconductor layer used in conventional solar panels.
Advertisement

Concentrated solar power has been held back by the difficulty of finding semiconductors that divide up the spectrum in the optimal way, but that also have matching crystalline structures, which makes the cells easy to fabricate. Solar Junction's technology tackles the problem for the infrared end of the spectrum, the part that's proven the most challenging for multi-junction cell developers. In conventional multi-junction cells semiconductor materials designed for this part of the spectrum either absorb light that's too far into the infrared or aren't compatible with the other semiconductors in the cell, and so require costly buffer layers.

Stauffer says that his company's new materials have neither of those problems. He isn't disclosing details about what the materials are made of, but he says that their crystalline structure is compatible with other semiconductor materials used in multi-junction cells, and they can be modified to absorb different wavelengths to optimize efficiency. (The company calls them Adjustable Spectrum Lattice Matched materials).
<span style="color: #660000">
The new cells, which use one of the new materials, convert 41 percent of the energy in sunlight into electricity, compared to 38 to 39 percent for other multi-junction cells on the market. (World record efficiencies are higher than this, but researchers have achieved such levels with one-off cells made in the lab, not on a production line.) A jump of two percentage points can make a big difference in the price of solar systems, especially with concentrated photovoltaics, where only about 20 percent of the cost is the cells. Increasing power output from the cells reduces the number of lenses, metal frames, tracking systems, and other components that account for 80 percent of costs.</span>

Stauffer says that the company has also made two more novel semiconductors that, when added to future cells, could bring efficiencies up to 50 percent. Because the materials can all be easily grown on top of each other, these five-layer devices can be made for the same cost as three-layer devices. He anticipates that the company can produce such cells within five years.

"I wouldn't be surprised if they get to 50 percent, but the question is when, and how much they will cost," says Jerry Olson, a principal scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado. He says that the implementation will likely take longer than the company thinks, since the solar cells are complex.

Even at less than 10 cents per kilowatt hour, concentrated photovoltaics will still produce power at rates that are far more expensive than fossil fuel power, which often costs less than six cents per kilowatt hour, and has the considerable advantage of working day and night. Olson says that while concentrated photovoltaics are still relatively uncommon, they have the potential to be the cheapest type of solar photovoltaics, because high concentrations of sunlight reduce both the amount of land and expensive semiconductor material needed.

</span>

Sev
04-05-2011, 02:09 PM
Now if they can get the Quantum Dot tech off the ground, overcome the degradation problem that is in the current tech and combine it with the new battery tech http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=346776#Post346776, viable off grid energy solutions would be a reality.

pooltchr
04-05-2011, 02:37 PM
I see that some of our leftist friends who complain that all you do is post hateful things about them aren't at all interested in discussing much of anything that they can't turn into a political, hate filled, thread.

Go figure!

Steve

Sev
04-05-2011, 02:52 PM
Its one of the reasons I stopped posting non political threads. For all there complaining about he site being a wasteland when of political threads surface there is silence.

However now that I am aware that Sofla, Eg, Sack, yourself and Larry enjoy them I'll post them more often.

Sev
04-06-2011, 12:33 PM
Kind of surprised none our alternative energy enthusiasts have not chimed in.

LWW
04-06-2011, 12:43 PM
The regime prohibits them from possessing such knowledge.

cushioncrawler
04-06-2011, 05:48 PM
Very interesting. I will look into this stuff when i finish writing my new book on snilliards.
Re batterys and the grid. Didnt i see where there woz a plan to konnekt battery cars to the grid during the nite, to charge up, and during the day, to provide power to the grid.
Konnekting cars to house solar power kood do a similar trick too.
mac.

Sev
04-06-2011, 08:43 PM
If advancing tech allows them to make strides in solar more quickly it may actually become a viable option.

LWW
04-07-2011, 02:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If advancing tech allows them to make strides in solar more quickly it may actually become a viable option. </div></div>

Which is why large parts of the green movement now are protesting solar.

As long as it's limited to use by the leftist elite, so they speak about how much greener they are, it's fine. When it becomes viable is when their true anti capitalist agenda rears it's ugly head.

Currently solar farms being placed in the desert are being protested.

If you can't put a solar farm in the middle of the desolate areas of the nation without a bunch of hippies protesting ... where can one be put?

If solar becomes viable ... the moonbat crazy left will undoubtedly do everything within their collectivist powers to sabotage US solar independence. Nations that will not give a rat's arse ... such as Cuba, Mexico, Saudi Arabia ... will build massive solar farms and continue as things are now.

Sev
04-07-2011, 07:08 AM
The danger of having highly efficient residential solar that allows individual to get off grid is that it is not taxable.

For example. Lets say quantum dot tech or another viable solar option actually achieves 75% efficiency and the effective cost of production drops to say 5 cents per kilowatt.

Then add the new batter tech that is out there. High capacity and light weight of those discussed in another thread plus the self charging batters that absorb energy from the environment around them.

Now at some point the Quantum dot tech may become a spray on film. That being a possible scenario you would be able to use as a paint for a car.
Combine the battery tech with a with a solar efficiancy of 75% and you may well have a vehicle that would never run out of energy as even at night both the quantum dots and self charging batteries would be absorbing energy. Add generators to each wheel hub and you have more energy generation while the car is moving.

Should this occur at reasonable prices both the need for diesal and gasoline will drop substantially and the revenue generated from both will dry up.
For states such as NY which have a cumulative tax about 40-50 cents per gallon this would be devastating. I believe the fed gets 20 cents per gallon.

Now add to this all the homes that would be removed from the grid. Revenues on electrical usage would also dry up.

The question then becomes where does the state and fed make up those taxes.

Highly efficient energy tech that does not require logistical support in the form of energy grids and supply lines will be a budget buster for both the state and the fed.
This is one reason why free energy is dangerous to governments.
Individuals gain energy independence at the cost of government revenues.

LWW
04-07-2011, 07:21 AM
But the state can't tax an off grid home for it's power usage ... hence it will forever be pie in the sky, until it is taxed of course.

The first step to taxation is demonization.

That is a basic Alinsky tactic.

Stretch
04-07-2011, 09:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The danger of having highly efficient residential solar that allows individual to get off grid is that it is not taxable.

For example. Lets say quantum dot tech or another viable solar option actually achieves 75% efficiency and the effective cost of production drops to say 5 cents per kilowatt.

Then add the new batter tech that is out there. High capacity and light weight of those discussed in another thread plus the self charging batters that absorb energy from the environment around them.

Now at some point the Quantum dot tech may become a spray on film. That being a possible scenario you would be able to use as a paint for a car.
Combine the battery tech with a with a solar efficiancy of 75% and you may well have a vehicle that would never run out of energy as even at night both the quantum dots and self charging batteries would be absorbing energy. Add generators to each wheel hub and you have more energy generation while the car is moving.

Should this occur at reasonable prices both the need for diesal and gasoline will drop substantially and the revenue generated from both will dry up.
For states such as NY which have a cumulative tax about 40-50 cents per gallon this would be devastating. I believe the fed gets 20 cents per gallon.

Now add to this all the homes that would be removed from the grid. Revenues on electrical usage would also dry up.

The question then becomes where does the state and fed make up those taxes.

Highly efficient energy tech that does not require logistical support in the form of energy grids and supply lines will be a budget buster for both the state and the fed.
This is one reason why free energy is dangerous to governments.
Individuals gain energy independence at the cost of government revenues. </div></div>

The government is very good at taxing us. They will find a way. Wasn't it Reagan who said " The Governments view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases. "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moveing, regulate it. If it stops moveing, subsidize it.

A few methods they could use to screw you (if we're lucky we'll get to choose the position) is that they would levy a delivery tax, or production tax of x amount for every kilowatt hour produced for wind and solar energy. Not alot different from a sales tax really.

For cars useing alternative energy they could simply check your mileage when you go to the DMV to renew your plates and tax you on the miles driven.

Don't worry, they will get their due one way or another. St.

wolfdancer
04-07-2011, 09:43 AM
good post!!!

Sev
04-07-2011, 04:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The danger of having highly efficient residential solar that allows individual to get off grid is that it is not taxable.

For example. Lets say quantum dot tech or another viable solar option actually achieves 75% efficiency and the effective cost of production drops to say 5 cents per kilowatt.

Then add the new batter tech that is out there. High capacity and light weight of those discussed in another thread plus the self charging batters that absorb energy from the environment around them.

Now at some point the Quantum dot tech may become a spray on film. That being a possible scenario you would be able to use as a paint for a car.
Combine the battery tech with a with a solar efficiancy of 75% and you may well have a vehicle that would never run out of energy as even at night both the quantum dots and self charging batteries would be absorbing energy. Add generators to each wheel hub and you have more energy generation while the car is moving.

Should this occur at reasonable prices both the need for diesal and gasoline will drop substantially and the revenue generated from both will dry up.
For states such as NY which have a cumulative tax about 40-50 cents per gallon this would be devastating. I believe the fed gets 20 cents per gallon.

Now add to this all the homes that would be removed from the grid. Revenues on electrical usage would also dry up.

The question then becomes where does the state and fed make up those taxes.

Highly efficient energy tech that does not require logistical support in the form of energy grids and supply lines will be a budget buster for both the state and the fed.
This is one reason why free energy is dangerous to governments.
Individuals gain energy independence at the cost of government revenues. </div></div>

The government is very good at taxing us. They will find a way. Wasn't it Reagan who said " The Governments view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases. "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moveing, regulate it. If it stops moveing, subsidize it.

A few methods they could use to screw you (if we're lucky we'll get to choose the position) is that they would levy a delivery tax, or production tax of x amount for every kilowatt hour produced for wind and solar energy. Not alot different from a sales tax really.

For cars useing alternative energy they could simply check your mileage when you go to the DMV to renew your plates and tax you on the miles driven.

Don't worry, they will get their due one way or another. St. </div></div>

Oh I have no doubt.

However if you are off grid with solar and wind how do they justify taxing energy that exists naturally?
As far as the cars go it is possible to retro fit a model A for electric or any other vehicle for that matter. I believe the first electric cars came out in the 1880's

I guess they could do a millage tax. Assuming there was a working odometer or they installed a tracking device.

LWW
04-07-2011, 04:07 PM
They just fined Tesla for non compliance on a car that cannot have tailpipe emissions.

Sev
04-07-2011, 05:29 PM
Hey if they can get money from the dead I want in.

LWW
04-08-2011, 02:55 AM
They've been doing that for decades.

Sev
04-08-2011, 07:37 AM
Well ya sort of.