Slashdot Mirror
Solar Cells Get Boost
An anonymous reader writes "Researchers from Los Alamos National Laboratory have tapped the efficiencies of nanotechnology to double solar cells' potential energy production. The key to the method is the use of lead selenium nanocrystals which can produce 2 electrons where 1 was produced before. Other optical applications can also benefit."
The article seems to imply that the technique would be applicable to existing materials, but also seems to imply that it has only been show to work for lead-selenium nanocrystals. So will the technique of using nanocrystals work with other materials? If not, will incorporating the lead-selenium nanocrystals in a matrix of conventional material, nanocrystal-sized or otherwise, generate two electrons/photon? And finally, does the cost of making the nanocrystals make the whole thing not cost effective, other perhaps in something like spacecraft, where every once saved is of tremendous worth?
If you can't beat them, embrace and extend them.
for every time I heard about cheaper, more efficient solar cell, I could buy a solar powered calculator. Which is just about all I've seen solar power be good for at the consumer level.
Cloud City Digital: DVD Production at its cheapest/finest
I think you're trying to make a funny, but in case you aren't... They are nano crystals. That probably means that while they're made from lead, there still isn't much lead in each cell. Also, solar cells can easily last for 100 years, it's not like they're disposable. Not to mention the fossil fuels they displace.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
See the problem is this article made no mention of Linux or how evil Microsoft is. This is /. after all. If you want to get more posts, make a comment about how Microsoft's new OS is going to natively support solar sell power management and that Linux needs to create another Sourceforge project to provide it for free.
I think the majority of the people not lurking and posting are people who actually feel passionate about free energy. I am just waiting for a Linux geek touting that he is running a Beowolf Cluster on 100% solar power.
It is indeed a shame that more interest in this technology doesn't exist. The lack of responses to this article is pretty disappointing, especially since I would think /.ers would be one of the main supporters. Doubling the output of cells is a definite improvement.
I remember reading somewhere (IIRC one of the Real Goods Source Books) that had the phrase similar to "Solar Panels will never become widely accepted until they are available from your local Home Depot." This definitely rings true. Aside from the solar powered walkway lights (total garbage), they have very little to offer there. Solar Cells need to be cheaper and more powerful if people are going to use them.
It's good to see that progress is being made, though, as this article describes. Perhaps one day it will indeed become practical to use solar panels. Until then, we're stuck with calculators.
From what I can tell there not manufacturing solar cells using "lead selenium nanocrystals" but rather they found a method of detecting "impact ionization" via the delay between the photon impact and electron emissions. They then tested several substances and discovered that lead selenium nanocrystals produced impact ionization on close to 100% of photon impacts.
So if you really want to know what's going on you need to discover how efferent lead selenium solar cell's are and what it takes to mass produce lead selenium nanocrystals in a cheep long lasting solar cell.
So it's a long way from producing 60+% efficient solar cells but it's still cool.
All true, but it in no way invalidates the grandparent post -- sillier things than that have drawn the ire of environmentalists.
On a more reasonable note, remember that the manufacturing processes for many "green" technologies are themselves polluting and producing dangerous and toxic byproducts.
-- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
You do realize that you don't see the point? This isn't an article about energy storage, it's an article about energy generation. Fuel cells are great, how do they relate to the article?
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
Let's look at what the real implications of cheap solar power are:
But, the interesting fact is that there are industries, countries and individuals that stand to lose billions of dollars in income if/when such advances in solar energy take place. And billions of dollars they make now buy _a_lot_ of influence. So, don't expect the changes to happen overnight, or any time soon...
Although it sounds fine, it really is a problem for the power companies; retail rates not only include generation costs, but the huge effort that goes on in transmission and load balancing. To be realistic, this sort of metering should be generation costs only.
Just because he doesn't fit the profile of the average consumer does not mean that he is not a general consumer; he doesn't have any billing arrangements that are not available to everyone else.
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
If fewer neanderthals would whine "if it's so good, why isn't everyone doing it", more people would do it. And we'd get further out of the doomed hole we've dug with our paleolithic energy economy.
--
make install -not war
Watts/m^2 is still important...
The economics of solar power get really interesting when the price gets down to $1/w. For a 10% efficiency, the installed cost of the array needs to come in at $100/m^2 (~$10/ft^2) - at 50% efficiency we're talking $500/m^2 (~$50/ft^2). I would hazard a guess that the support structure and glazing would come in around $10/ft^2 (or more). The last point makes low efficiency cells kind of a non-starter, unless made to replace roofing materials.
A Shadeless room is a brighter room.