The New Dawn of Solar (Nanosolar wins PopSci 2007 award -- claims 30 cents/watt cost)

Popular Science ^ | Nov 2007 issue | Michael Moyer

[Uncledave]

The New Dawn of Solar

Imagine a solar panel without the panel. Just a coating, thin as a layer of paint, that takes light and converts it to electricity. From there, you can picture roof shingles with solar cells built inside and window coatings that seem to suck power from the air. Consider solar-powered buildings stretching not just across sunny Southern California, but through China and India and Kenya as well, because even in those countries, going solar will be cheaper than burning coal. That’s the promise of thin-film solar cells: solar power that’s ubiquitous because it’s cheap. The basic technology has been around for decades, but this year, Silicon Valley–based Nanosolar created the manufacturing technology that could make that promise a reality.

The company produces its PowerSheet solar cells with printing-press-style machines that set down a layer of solar-absorbing nano-ink onto metal sheets as thin as aluminum foil, so the panels can be made for about a tenth of what current panels cost and at a rate of several hundred feet per minute. With backing from Google’s founders and $20 million from the U.S. Department of Energy, Nanosolar’s first commercial cells rolled off the presses this year.

Cost has always been one of solar’s biggest problems. Traditional solar cells require silicon, and silicon is an expensive commodity (exacerbated currently by a global silicon shortage). What’s more, says Peter Harrop, chairman of electronics consulting firm IDTechEx, “it has to be put on glass, so it’s heavy, dangerous, expensive to ship and expensive to install because it has to be mounted.” And up to 70 percent of the silicon gets wasted in the manufacturing process. That means even the cheapest solar panels cost about $3 per watt of energy they go on to produce. To compete with coal, that figure has to shrink to just $1 per watt.

Nanosolar’s cells use no silicon, and the company’s manufacturing process allows it to create cells that are as efficient as most commercial cells for as little as 30 cents a watt. “You’re talking about printing rolls of the stuff—printing it on the roofs of 18-wheeler trailers, printing it on garages, printing it wherever you want it,” says Dan Kammen, founding director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley. “It really is quite a big deal in terms of altering the way we think about solar and in inherently altering the economics of solar.”

In San Jose, Nanosolar has built what will soon be the world’s largest solar-panel manufacturing facility. CEO Martin Roscheisen claims that once full production starts early next year, it will create 430 megawatts’ worth of solar cells a year—more than the combined total of every other solar plant in the U.S. The first 100,000 cells will be shipped to Europe, where a consortium will be building a 1.4-megawatt power plant next year.

Right now, the biggest question for Nanosolar is not if its products can work, but rather if it can make enough of them. California, for instance, recently launched the Million Solar Roofs initiative, which will provide tax breaks and rebates to encourage the installation of 100,000 solar roofs per year, every year, for 10 consecutive years (the state currently has 30,000 solar roofs). The company is ready for the solar boom. “Most important,” Harrop says, “Nanosolar is putting down factories instead of blathering to the press and doing endless experiments. These guys are getting on with it, and that is impressive.” nanosolar.com —MICHAEL MOYER

[Myrddin]

Your link goes to a more useful map. It puts my area between 2.7 and 3.3 hours per day for winter peak.

[Kellis91789]

Thanks. The original report it came from is no longer at

http://www.nrel.gov/gis/il_solar_pv.html

which is a little frustrating.

As I suspected, though, it purports to show the “total” solar radiation available. Using a standard of 12% efficiency like Nanosolar PV cells, and their 6.5kw/m2/h number, that would still give 780wh per square meter in Arizona, which is 50% higher than I’ve seen before.

And the graph says it includes cloud cover, water vapor, sun angle, etc. adjustments already. If you believed this graphic, then even the state along the Canadian broder would manage 500wh per square meter per day.

[Kellis91789]

Meaning you’d probably need 10kw capacity = 1,000sf of panels to get you 1,000kwh per month. If Nanosolar cells actually come to market at $0.30 per peak watt, they would become a relatively small part of the total system cost.

Where I could get by with $2,000 in panels you’d need $3,000 in panels. The rest of the system — batteries or grid-tie electronics, inverter, etc. — would make total cost $10,000 and $11,000, I bet.

This is a huge difference compared to today and silicon PV. 10KW of silicon panels would cost $40K.

[dan1123]

Energy density is a problem of solar too. If efficiency doesn’t increase, then many applications will remain out of reach of solar.

[Leo Carpathian]

That seems pretty odd. If it is privately held and on the edge of extreme success you would think the good Dr. would endure whatever to become filthy rich. Something is up.

Exactly. If I was involved in a good thing, I would stick around to reap the windfall.
Seems that there is a crop of modern snake oil "scientists" coming up with "amazing" breakthroughs, sucking up investors with no clue, only to later fizzle out due to .... problem. When one closely looks at the guts of the "venture" claims often include some "breakthrough" that is camouflaged nonsense.
It will be interesting to see what develops here, sounds interesting, seems like more PR than quietly proceeding to have product ready to sell.

[Myrddin]

Where I could get by with $2,000 in panels you’d need $3,000 in panels. The rest of the system — batteries or grid-tie electronics, inverter, etc. — would make total cost $10,000 and $11,000, I bet.

I spent $13,000 after tax credits on a thermo-syphonic solar hot water heating system in San Diego. It was supposed to have a 20 year service life. It provided 100% of my hot water needs from March to October. I used it in "pre-heat" mode from November to February. Gas prices never went high enough to amortize the system...assuming that it lasted for the full 20 years. It didn't. It was fully effective for about 6 years, then the calcium in the San Diego water supply corroded the storage tanks, wetted the insulation and made the system unusable. Of course the supplier had gone out of business, so I had no recourse on the "warranty".

I pay about 5 cents per kw-hr right now. Solar has to get a bunch cheaper to make it interesting. I was paying 25 to 30 cents per kw-hr in San Diego (1999/2000), so it would have been more interesting economically and more viable in terms of available insolation.

[PapaBear3625]

Michigan gets 80% of the insolation that southern state like Florida get.

Most of Michigan gets less than half the solar energy that most of Florida gets. See solar energy map

[mdmathis6]

Domestic prices may go up but on the other hand with less and less foreign oil being consumed the price for that should drop as well with foreign despots licking our hands instead of buying them just to induce us to buy more of their oil. Its no secret that Arab oil interests have shown interest in buying stakes in emerging alternative energy technologies because of America’s past genius in solving past technological problems. They can see the hand writing on the wall when America finally hits about 80 percent of its energy needs being supplied domestically with the other twenty percent remaining “adjustable” as to source, type, and supply(meaning we could do without the Arabs or Venenzuela)

The Zero Sum gain/loss bean counters also never seem to factor in as well the intrinsic costs of BEING INDEPENDENT from other nations, even if Domestic energy sources are a bit more costly to produce! You say that the ratio of (ie cheaper than Domstic)Foreign Oil vs Domestic may have to increase as Domestic supplies would be more expensive to produce. But as alternative sources of energy more and more hit the market...the over-all need for oil from any source will diminish putting downward pressures on all world wide oil prices. That is, not counting the FUD that oil futures speculators love to put out to spook oil prices higher!

I don’t think we’ll ever be free of the need of oil in terms of manufacturing...we get so many use-ful products from it. The advances being made in alternative fuels and energy sources how-ever will certainly give us more leverage in dealing with foreign oil despots, who with these current higher prices are exacting a Dhimmitude Tax on us already!

[mdmathis6]

You’ve suffered from the Binghamton Blahss to, hunh?
I grew up there, finally moved down to Virginia for good.

The kids sure miss the snow, though!

[RobRoy]

Do they have it in yellow?

[MortMan]

I lived in Outer Bingolia for 11 years, with another 14 up in the Finger Lakes region. I miss the snow - but can live without the 16 month winter! ;-P

[PapaBear3625]

In San Diego, you would get the equivalent of 5 hrs of sunlight, so a 1-watt panel would give you a KWh in 200 days. If the cost of electricity was 0.30/kWh, and the cost of the complete system was double the cost of the panels, then payoff would come in about a year and a half. Which would be an economical payback period even without subsidy

All this of course assumes that they will actually be able to deliver at the price-point specified, and that the product lasts long enough to be worth installation costs

[meyer]

Once it goes on the grid, you've got to manage it.....

In more ways than one! Self-generation is also a problem at the distribution level. Any source connected to the grid is a potential hazard to lineman.

Picture the typical storm scenario - wind blows through, knocks down a few trees, lightning strikes and blows the occasional insulator or fuse. The lineman comes out after the storm and sees that a tree had fallen, causing a fuse or circuit breaker a mile away to blow or trip, resulting in a power outage. His job is to get the tree out of the wires and get the wires back up, and then restore power.

But he won't start working just yet - first, he has to open or check open and red-tag all switches that could possibly energize the line he's working on. Pretty routine today, when all possible sources are mapped and are generally few in number. Perhaps two or three switches and he's made it safe to ground the conductors and start working. He will not work without a proper tagging procedure - it isn't safe to do so, and it's in violation with OSHA standards that have been in effect for decades (back when OSHA really meant something).

But wait - what if 2 or 3 or 10 or 50 customers have their own power source. Now, the lineman has a choice. He can go to each home and disconnect the meter, and tag, or he can hang working grounds, potentially damaging any generation or power source that has been inadvertently connected to the damaged part of the distribution system. I know what I'd do if I were a lineman wanting to restore power to my customers.

Incidentally, this problem has cropped up on occasion when people pull out the portable gasoline-powered generator after a storm and proceed to backfeed the distribution lines. Most people don't even think about installing a proper transfer switch to prevent feeding the incoming line, and it's evident that some don't even bother to open the main breaker before connecting their generator.

[Kellis91789]

Yeah, there is conflicting info. Not sure who to believe.

[He says there’s a misconception about a lack of sunlight in the Great Lakes State. “Germany has led the world in solar installations for the last two or three years, and they get fewer hours of ‘insolation’, or viable sunlight than we do in Michigan,” said D’Alecy. “Michigan gets 80 percent of the solar radiation that Jacksonville, Florida receives.]

From:

http://www.michigan.org/mbr/enewsletter/combo.asp?ContentId=6890C2E7-CBB5-464E-84E9-8CA50F56BF32

[Kellis91789]

Well, at PV is a solid-state technology. No fluids or moving parts to worry about.

I’m still in SoCal, and it kills me to see my AVERAGE rate during the summer run $0.25kwh and my peak $0.35kwh. For a condo with just me living there. A larger home would probably have most of my bill at the higher penalty rates.

Now I’m looking at building a place in the desert where I’d be off-grid, and $50K for a solar PV system is giving me pause. A $10K system would fit my budget much better.

[jas3]

Domestic prices may go up but on the other hand with less and less foreign oil being consumed the price for that should drop as well with foreign despots licking our hands instead of buying them just to induce us to buy more of their oil. Its no secret that Arab oil interests have shown interest in buying stakes in emerging alternative energy technologies because of America’s past genius in solving past technological problems. They can see the hand writing on the wall when America finally hits about 80 percent of its energy needs being supplied domestically with the other twenty percent remaining “adjustable” as to source, type, and supply(meaning we could do without the Arabs or Venenzuela)

You have misunderstood what I wrote.

Any drop in prices will lead to the shut-in of US oil production, since it is much more expensive to produce oil domestically.

Domestic prices would go DOWN, not up, were there to be some new energy sources, as you imagine above.

The Zero Sum gain/loss bean counters also never seem to factor in as well the intrinsic costs of BEING INDEPENDENT from other nations, even if Domestic energy sources are a bit more costly to produce! You say that the ratio of (ie cheaper than Domstic)Foreign Oil vs Domestic may have to increase as Domestic supplies would be more expensive to produce. But as alternative sources of energy more and more hit the market...the over-all need for oil from any source will diminish putting downward pressures on all world wide oil prices. That is, not counting the FUD that oil futures speculators love to put out to spook oil prices higher!

There are no significant energy independent nations on the planet. Even the Saudis import refined products. Energy independence is neither possible nor desireable.

Domestic petroleum is not "a bit more costly"; it is 2 or 3 times as expensive.

There are no significant alternative enrgy source that are hitting the market. Nor are any likely in the next 10 years. Oil prices will continue to rise along with demand as India and China continue to industrialize. Additionally oil prices will rise in US dollar terms as the US dollar continues to decline.

I don’t think we’ll ever be free of the need of oil in terms of manufacturing...we get so many use-ful products from it. The advances being made in alternative fuels and energy sources how-ever will certainly give us more leverage in dealing with foreign oil despots, who with these current higher prices are exacting a Dhimmitude Tax on us already!

The US will continue to import petroleum in greater quantities every year for at least the next decade. The "leverage" from insignificant contributions to the US total energy budget such as from solar, wind, or biofuels will make no real difference. The only possibility for the US to change its energy sources significantly would be to construct scores of new nuclear plants, which is quite unlikely.

jas3

[chimera]

Some very good points, thanks for the contribution and alternate viewpoint. I seem to recall this hazard being of great concern in the early days of grid-based distribution when interconnections and tie-ins were more or less haphazard in nature, with various companies and customers interconnected in non-standard ways, You’d get line energizations at unexpected times, and (avoidable) fatalities would result. For a time, the occupation of power lineman had the shortest expected lifetime of any tradesman. We could very well end up going back to the future in that sense if widespread distributed power sources become more commonplace.

[Nachoman]

Even if this doesn’t work out, we might be able to use the technology to kill people.

[Robert A Cook PE]

I have a LOT of reservations about today’s “ordinary” American (ie - technical numbskulls and TV-educated dimwits) homeowners mixing up the insides of their homes, garages and basements with high-amp DC sources, lead-acid batteries, DC “welding” leads (at 100+ amps) and H2 emitting sources....

Accidents will happen - and those not back & life scarring will be deadly.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Michigan gets 80% of the insolation that southern state like Florida get.
Most of Michigan gets less than half the solar energy that most of Florida gets.

?

Look at even a “southern” city like Atlanta: 3.3 insolation compared to the max at 5.5 (at that only for 4-5 hours per day - from 10:00 until 3:00!): that’s = 60%