Slashdot Mirror
New Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record
asoduk writes to tell us that a new world record has been set for the most efficient photovoltaic device. Topping the scale at 40.8% efficiency, the new solar cell differs significantly from the previous record holder. "Instead of using a germanium wafer as the bottom junction of the device, the new design uses compositions of gallium indium phosphide and gallium indium arsenide to split the solar spectrum into three equal parts that are absorbed by each of the cell's three junctions for higher potential efficiencies. This is accomplished by growing the solar cell on a gallium arsenide wafer, flipping it over, then removing the wafer. The resulting device is extremely thin and light and represents a new class of solar cells with advantages in performance, design, operation and cost."
How much do they cost and when can I get some?
400 watts per meter would let me go solar without cutting usage at all!
Call me in 20 years when they're in production. Seems it always takes that long for these innovations to get to market nowadays.
Lets just prove it is not cancergnous...
How much?
sounds good but when do we get them on the back of our rugged, 3G enabled, touch screen netbooks?
cool? yes, but only in the most esoteric sense. I've said MANY times before, fantastic new photovoltaic technology is announced every 6 months or so, NONE of it ever reaches the market. Call me when the ROI on home solar breaks the 20 year mark in my area. Right now it's almost 100 years.
Yet another break through in technology that we won't see for a long time and some how that is news worthy. But of course by the time we might actually see this new technology in commercial use somebody will claim 50-90% efficiency and yet again won't see any possible commercial availability for years to come.
Yes my post's subject's acronym doesn't exist and no I have no idea how to pronounce it. :P
This space is not for rent.
At 40%, you're talking about 400W when in direct sunlight. With eight hours of sunlight per day the average house needs less than four square metres. Now, of course, you aren't going to be using the most power at the times when these are generating, but it can definitely put a significant dent in your electricity bills.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
looks like its getting slashdotted already.
Even TFA doesn't say what the previous record was or provide any quantitative comparison.
....another world record by 0.1% .... wake me when we get to 70-80%
Was taking forever to load, so here's the article:
Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed, fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a sunny day. The new cell is a natural candidate for the space satellite market and for terrestrial concentrated photovoltaic arrays, which use lenses or mirrors to focus sunlight onto the solar cells.
The new solar cell differs significantly from the previous record holder - also based on a NREL design. Instead of using a germanium wafer as the bottom junction of the device, the new design uses compositions of gallium indium phosphide and gallium indium arsenide to split the solar spectrum into three equal parts that are absorbed by each of the cell's three junctions for higher potential efficiencies. This is accomplished by growing the solar cell on a gallium arsenide wafer, flipping it over, then removing the wafer. The resulting device is extremely thin and light and represents a new class of solar cells with advantages in performance, design, operation and cost.
NREL's Mark Wanlass invented the original inverted cell, which recently won a R&D 100 award. His design was modified by a team led by John Geisz that further optimized the junction energies by making the middle junction metamorphic as well as the bottom junction. Metamorphic junctions are lattice mismatched - their atoms don't line up. The material properties of the mismatched semiconductors allows for greater potential conversion of sunlight.
NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for DOE by Midwest Research Institute and Battelle.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/12/new_world_recor.php
TFA is slashdotted, but a little googling shows this happened two years ago.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
We will have solar energy as soon as the utility companies solve one technical problem -- how to run a sunbeam through a meter.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
A new efficiency record is nice and all, but most people have more than enough room on their roofs to power their homes with current efficiencies. What's really needed for solar PV is to be much less expensive. When I can get a complete system installed for $1/Watt, I'd gladly switch to solar. And before someone mentions Nanosolar, they hope to eventually get down to $1/Watt, and they have limited production, which is already sold to Germany. End-users cannot get anything from them.
When can I get a solar powered SUV!
Just bitter over the Goddamn gas shortage here in Atlanta (Virtually NO gas)- and watching the housewives in their V-8 SUVs driving around and I can't find any gas for my 35+ mpg 4 cylinder.
Unfortunately, the technology identified is verboten in at least two major world religions (you can't mix those bits, it's _unnatural_). Not to mention that bringing these to market in any meaningful volume is at variance with the interests of some of the largest industrial lobbies in the world. But we might as well blame it on something goofy, since the more accurate Syriana-type background actors and machinations are just too depressing.
I would love to see for just once, an article that states that the mentioned technology is being produced en masse and possibly a website from where I can order it, wherever I may be at a reasonable price. I am asking too much, eh?
... what about fragility? Ultra-thin can have a downside.
I no longer get excited about stories like this, as it doesn't matter unless someone figures out how to mass produce this stuff and make it available for the market. If I'm not mistaken photovoltaic production hasn't changed in years despite all this new technology. Why not run a story on why mfgs are taking so long to adopt this.
...that a 12 year old invented it. And that this new solar cell stores like fifteen times the energy of the sun.
You can quote me on that.
getting there, slowly but surely, getting there...
Indium is a very rare material, one which we're slated to deplete in less than 10 years or so at current rates of consumption, due in part to its use in display screens.
I highly doubt that widespread use in solar cells would be feasible.
Nice efficiency, though.
Kythe
personally I would like to see the names changed to slack(_) slant (\) slash (/) and dash (-). It gives a logic to the hierachy and a slew of simple mnemonics for memorization.
GaInP and GaInAs are very(?) expensive, and poisonous to boot. I'm not sure this is the right way to go. Imagine having to deal with lots of discarded solar cells made of this stuff.
-- Cheers!
The 40.8 percent efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns.
So, as soon as we move to a solar system with 326 suns, this will be useful?
All this talk about wafers is making me crave a Kit Kat.
I'm just curious-- not implying that your calculations are wrong. I'm at the extreme other end in Arizona, and payback appears to be in the 10-15 year range for us, not counting resale and using a constant price for power for the next 15 years. That's well within the system warranty time, but may still be a bit too much for people to pay for up front.
Payback speed depends heavily on your local utility, their rates, their incentives, and whether they allow net-metering over the entire year, or just monthly. It also depends on whether or not you are willing to consider resale value as part of your payback time.
I suspect Hawaii is even better than Arizona despite having more cloudy days, just because power is so freaking expensive there.
In the long run, I think leases will win out. A couple of companies are offering deals where you lease the system and panels, and they promise your new smaller electric bill plus the lease cost will be lower than your current electric bill. A deal like this makes things suddenly interesting to people who don't have $20k to drop up front.
These things will be *very* expensive, I'll guess that the main application will be in spacecraft solar panels.
First, they use gallium, which is an expensive material. Second, from the description in the summary (TFA is slashdotted), they do one side, then flip it over and etch the backside to get at the junction from the back. Seems like a costly manufacturing process.
Price gouging: Not enough of it.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
all this talking about waffels is making me hungry. Do these solar cells come with some good syrup?
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
...what would the long-term savings of investing $700 billion in solar/wind/geo-thermal/etc. alternative energy be and how does that compare to the economic loss of not giving it to Wall Street?
Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
Gimme a break.
Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
Why does everyone think these would be used to produce electric power for domestic use? Something like this is much better suited for use on spacecraft.
When you are covering your roof you care about the power/cost ratio. On spacecraft you care a lot about power/weight ratio. This new type of cell address power/area which translates directly to power/weight
If you have an electric vehicle and travel 20k miles per year.
The economic case for photovoltaics comes from transportation rather than domestic energy production. This is a trick the solar companies and BEV companies seem to be missing.
One of these for instance.
http://www.cleanova.com/public/sve/
Postal companies, couriers, taxis etc etc.
Deleted
The reason I doubt photovoltaics will ever kick off is that solar thermal and solar heating are likely to be more cost effective. With high temperature brayton cycles solar thermal plants can reach above 50% efficiency, and they have other advantages, like the ability to buffer heat for night time electricity production. In colder climates photovoltaics get even harsher competition since a lot of energy is used for heating, which is much easier to collect with a relatively simple solar heating installation.
Photovoltaics is great for mobile and remote applications such as meterological instruments, sattelites, boats etc... For large scale production to power homes there are better alternatives.
Has the manufacturing process being studied in detail? I am more concerned about the process that may contaminated the environment.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
A lockup of credit markets is a bad thing, and so far I haven't seen any of the naysayers offer any way to prevent it other than the bailout.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
Does this need to be said again? There's no shortage of roof space and other places to locate solar cells, so the efficiency of the cells is only a marginal issue; the bigger issue is COST. Instead of focusing all the research on this penile my-cell-is-more-efficient-than-YOURS pissing contest, it ought to be focused on finding least toxic and least expensive means of production. Certainly large scale mass production will eventually reduce costs, but large scale adoption won't occur until they can be produced inexpensively enough in the first place to motivate widespread use. Efforts should be focused on finding the least expensive and least toxic method of production for now, and worry about improving efficiency once their use has become commonplace.
WTPOYSAIYHTWIANTITEIA? (What's the point of your stupid acronym if you have to write it all next to it to explain it anyways?)
source
Who says arse isnt good for anything. Oh ya, I went there.
40.8% efficiency of what? A narrow spectrum of light, or of all the solar energy landing on it? Numbers can be so deceptive.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I actually think there is a simple source to this. It's not so much to store energy but to re-direct it. If home owners with solar arrays are hooked up to the electrical grid they can sell power to the grid during the day to supply business and manufacturing. Then at night the grid will forward excess power not used by business back to the homeowners. There is no need to 'store' energy in the traditional sense.
Science is science.
As long as they're not using the half-mutilated corpses of oppressed minorities in their work, it's worth as much as anyone else's work.
The same goes for research coming out of ass-backwards places like Pakistan and Iran, if they ever got around to publishing this kind of research.
..because?....ummm?...it is a normal member of the world community?
No, no, no. I got it! We let this pariah state pretend to be a normal member of the world community just to piss off trolls! Woohoo! What do I win!
(Sorry to poke at the trolls, but that one was just to easy to resist!)
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
40.8% of solar power captured. That is, 40.8% of ~1000W/m^2 solar output, which means roughly 408W per square meter, which is exactly why this is so important.
These kinds of cells are typically multi-layer junction devices so that the longer wavelengths that are transparent to higher silicon layers are captured at lower layers. The whole spectrum still isn't captured, but we're right at the cutting edge with what's capable with current technology.
Nobody is giving $700B to anybody; the idea is to spend (up to) $700b on mortgage-backed bonds that might be worth $700b, or more, or a fair bit less (thus stopping the financial system from locking up like a TI-89 running Vista). Best case they actually make a paper profit on it.
That's a little different than building $700B worth of heniously overcomplicated solar cells.
That stuff you've been smoking, I want some. Gimme...
That's absolutely storage in the traditional sense, and random factories are in even less of a position to do it than power companies.
I agree with your skepticism regarding solar breakthroughs, much as I'd like to see one.
On the other hand, the way things are going with energy prices, solar may become competitive to fossil fuels just by standing still.
Call me when the ROI on home solar breaks the 20 year mark in my area. Right now it's almost 100 years.
You don't get much sun where you're at do you? Here's a spread sheet you can play with to calculate ROI, now I haven't looked at it so I don't know how good it it. This is the webpage that links to it. Of course you'd get a better return by increasing energy efficiency.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Please think of Young Sebastion before using gallium indium arsenide!
Here in New Mexico, we're getting ready to install solar water heating (for both domestic hot water and radiant floor/baseboard heat).
Have you checked about geothermal radiant floor heating? With the abundant sunlight solar may be more economical but then again geothermal might be better.
Personally I wouldn't want to stay in New Mexico, there may not be water there much longer. As it is now there's too much demand for water from the Colorado River, which supplies water to AZ, NM, NV, Southern Cal, and elsewhere.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
There's a lot of problems with that. It's great to forward all the extra power into the grid during the day, but all this does is cut the amount of fuel used by central generating stations at night when solar can't work or when the wind doesn't blow. "The grid" can't store energy and the "excess" power you describe at night isn't excess power but a lack of consumption, and that doesn't create power to be sent back to residences -- it still has to be generated somehow.
Also, there's a colossal inefficiency in feeding the grid from thousands of homes, each supplying some puny sub-5 kW of excess power. A lot of transmission loss and inability to channel it where its needed.
Pumped storage plants are a partial solution to that at least. Pump water uphill using the excess power during the day, then let it flow back downhill to generate hydro at night. It's surprisingly efficient. I know there's at least 1 pilot scheme in Scotland that's done pretty well so far.
"The grid" can't store energy and the "excess" power you describe at night isn't excess power but a lack of consumption, and that doesn't create power to be sent back to residences -- it still has to be generated somehow.
true but it's not about storage it's about relying less on hydrocarbons. you cut down on peak demand you cut down on the need for more stations. Over time I am sure we will move to a 100% envirofriendly production but till then this works well
Also, there's a colossal inefficiency in feeding the grid from thousands of homes, each supplying some puny sub-5 kW of excess power. A lot of transmission loss and inability to channel it where its needed.
5kW x 2mill homes = 10 MegaWatts This is quite a bit, especially compared to wear we are now. I do agree with the waste in transmission lines. I personally believe that we need to go back to the days of local generating stations. If people had to deal with there own fumes they would be more proactive in fixing the problem.
Now, of course, you aren't going to be using the most power at the times when these are generating
Actually that depends on the location. In some places air conditioning is the largest power demand, and it's needed mostly when it's sunny.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
There is no need to 'store' energy in the traditional sense.
Without efficient storage you end up having a bunch of coal/gas fired plants sitting around waiting for the inevitable cloudy day.
One alternative to improved storage would be more efficient long distance transport. After all it's almost always sunny somewhere.
We looked into geothermal, but it was prohibitively expensive - the drilling alone would have been $20-25k (we don't have the land for horizontal trenches, so we'd have to drill vertical wells).
Okay. I didn't think drilling would cost so much.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
5kW x 2mill homes = 10 MegaWatts
Try 10,000 megawatts.
a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
The raw materials won't exist after 2020, or perhaps even before, as we are simply using up the entire worlds' supply.
So all this crap about LED lighting and revolutionary advances in solar cells is a giant bunch of BS.
This will NEVER be used for regular homes. Far too expensive. Just the chemical make alone is an issue. But where this will make it will be the new solar cells for ISS in about 4 years or perhaps bigelow's stations, will use these. It really makes sense for that. Smaller surface area TYPICALLY means less metorite hits and less material to haul up, as well as easier to deploy. I would not be surprised to see a major load of these sent to the moon on the first trip or two to provide power for a moon base.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Show the housewives yours and see if you can get in behind her. Heck, she might even like the car. After all, the V8-SUV is no doubt for the husband.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The going rate is $12-15 per foot. We'd need an estimated eight 200' wells.
WOW! That's a lot, of money and wells.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Why mess around with solar cells when you can use that technology to turn lead into gold. We'll have so much gold that everyone on this planet will be so rich that they won't have a need for cheap solar power.
Gallium, iridium, arsenic... good god, I can just see the marchers gathered at the site for the proposed solar cell factory... "ARSENIC KILLS BABIES..." You won't see a single plant built in any US city limit, won't see it the suburbs in the Northeastern USA... about the only places you could build them are in out of the way places in the south.
This is my sig.
The article says that the 40% rating was achieved while being illuminated with the equivalent of 400 suns.
This is my sig.
no environmental impact studies
If you don't care about environmental impacts then I bet coal and gas fired power plants can be built faster than nuclear power plants. These studies are done for a reason though.
None of which are good for base load. If wind turbines can survive in the open marketplace (i.e. no government handouts like Pickens wants) who am I to question the invisible hand. But I wouldn't put down a major bet they could compete against nukes if nukes were given a chance.
People use France as an example of how nuclear power can compeat but even there the government subsidies nuclear power. According to one person how much nuclear power in France is subsidized is a "state secrete". The French nuclear power giant Areva is government owned, and will be compeating with US companies for US subsidies. Areva also may have some problems.
I won't be voting for McCain. Like most elections I will be voting against the Democratic Socialist Party's candidate.
I'm not voting for McCain either, if Bob Barr is not on the ballot I don't know if I will vote for anyone for President, I've left blanks on ballots before. As for your vote, please vote for whom you want to be president and not against, I'm guessing Obama. I did that in 2000 when I picked Gross, er Gore. I didn't want a Gore president but a Bush president was worse to me. After that vote I swore I would not vote against someone again.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
It's such an utter waste of resources developing these cells out of these rare elements. This isn't new news. What's even more ridiculous is it being heralded as a brilliant advancement that 1/10 of a percent is useless to everyone but the space faring industry.
Such a joke.
1. Heat water
2. Drive a Stirling engine.
3. Profit
You'd have to be making quite a bit of energy to be beneficial to the grid. That's highly unlikely for most homeowners and thus the cost for integration into the grid wouldn't be beneficial for electrical companies.
Or just use them to power your air conditioner. Being able to come home, guilt free, to a nice cold house in the summer months might be worth the upfront payment.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
but I think your conclusion is flawed. I'm not sure what it is you're trying to blame on the Carter administration, but the nuclear reactors that were in use in Carter's administration, were inefficient and sloppily designed reactors with little oversight and regulation.
In short they were an accident waiting to happ... oh wait it did happen. Thankfully President Carter knew how to react and played an important role in preventing the total melt-down of the Three Mile Island plant. The problem with the waste from fission reactors is they aren't terribly useful for power generation in the nuclear reactor designs in any US reactor that I'm aware of. Perhaps you could enlighten us on which reactors might be able to use this byproduct highly toxic waste? With say some citations?
1. Drive a Stirling engine.
2. Heat water(=cool engine)
3. Profit
...from previous meager 40.something percents to 40.8 current percent.
Scary stuff, man...
Don't think about it in such a narrow way. Research like this is very important. Humanity is here to stay for a long time. Imagine how Earth could be in a 100000 years, if humanity discovers fusion and affordable photovoltaic technology in, let's say, 1000 years.
The problem, from my and your perspective, is that these technologies may not be available in our timeframe. But future generations will need them, so it's not too late to start the research now.
I have a sort of cabin-y thing in my back garden.
Cost of solar power to run lights, vacuum cleaner, small heater etc installed by myself: 400 UKP
That's a lot of money for a few watts. but compare:
Cost of connecting cabin to mains and wiring it up (which I can't do myself if I ever want to sell the place): 400 UKP
Cost of notifying local government that I have made changes to the electrical system: 180 UKP, I kid you not.
So as you see, I saved money despite the high cost and low power output of PV systems.
Bureaucracy in action.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Hold on a second here - 20 years for payback?
Surely that cant be right -
I used the following figures -
Cost/Watt for the panel - $4
-> 1Kw system (for panels) $4,000
-> Inverter (grid tie) $1,500
-> Install, etc $1,000
System Cost = $6,500
Assuming 80% of rated output for 10 hours a day
-> 0.80 Kw * 10 = 8kW/day
1Kwh (1 unit) in Ireland costs about $0.25
So each day, this saves $2 of electricity
So a year that means 700 bucks, or payback in about 9 years.
Still not excellent time-frame, but considering
a) NanoSolar claim to be mass producing 1$/watt panels for consumer market next year
b) Cost of electricity (at least in Ireland) has been going up by ~15-20% a year
I'd expect the payback to converge on about two or three years.
Anyone else have other numbers?
Anyone else have expected payback numbers on other renewables - like domestic wind power, etc?
"This is accomplished by growing the solar cell on a gallium arsenide wafer, flipping it over, then removing the wafer."
Reminded me of this for some reason.
http://xkcd.com/153/
as cited in
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/09/cryptography_ca.html.
I don't know how well slashdot knows xkcd;
can i just call out "/153/" and get a laugh?