Slashdot Mirror
Record-Breaking Solar Cells Tailored To Location
Urchin writes "The quality of sunlight varies depending on where you live, but off-the-shelf solar cells are all identical. A new solar cell designed by UK firm Quantasol is easily tuned to adapt to the local light conditions, which boosts its long-term performance. Its short-term performance isn't bad though — the single junction solar cell has a peak efficiency greater than any previous device, beating a world record that's stood for 21 years."
I know I'm heading to the moderation cellar for this, but COME ON guys, don't be so damn lazy about your language. See my sig below.
That kind of mistake is a huge cognitive speed bump for many readers. You're blowing your chance to communicate with your audience when you make (and belittle complaints about) adolescent mistakes like this.
One simple rule for its versus it's
Multi-junction cells are over 40%.
We should start dealing in those black-market beagles.
Current silicon cells are about 15-20% average efficiency, NOT 10-12%. They peak at just over 25% efficient as demonstrated by the research lab at the University of New South Wales in Australia.
SunPower A300 silicon cells average about 20% per bin.
It's true. The Fraunhofer Institute itself has produced more efficient cells. And all use multiple junctions.
Examples:
Fraunhofer - triple junction
NREL - triple junction
University of Delaware - bream splitting
All claim to be the record because there is no standardized way to measure power efficiency. However, the concept of quantum wells used in solar cells is a new concept.
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
If you're already buying an acre or more of heliostatic mirrors, it'd probably be cheaper and more efficient to use a solar fired steam turbine to do the generating. Then, if you use a molten salt reservoir, you have some energy storage for night-time power generation as well.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
It translates into an acre of cheap mirrors instead of an acre of expensive solar panels.
Not quite the same: concentrating mirrors suck in anything but a perfectly clear day (i.e. no clouds), but a simple non-concentrated PV panel still works quite well with some (not much) cloud coverage. In other words: unless you live in AZ or some other desert, stick with non-concentrated PV panels.
Just so you know, in most non-US English-speaking countries, abbreviations that end with the last letter of the world don't get a period after them. Examples:
Mr
vs
Dr
versus:
Mich.
Univ.
Rev.
In the US, we just got lazy and started using periods everywhere.
Spectrolab has the solar cell world record with their triple junction GaAs cells at 40.7% at about 400x or 500x. Amonix Corporation has the silicon world record at 27.6% at approximately the same concentration level.
More efficient technology does not mean wider applications irrespective of cost. Technology is defined as being more efficient BY what it costs; if it costs less it is more efficient. The science is still interesting but from a practical standpoint whether or not these will be used widely is directly related to the average cost of the electricity it produces. There is a reason that we don't use people pedaling on bicycles to produce electricity; because of the cost. If labor were much cheaper than burning coal then we would use that instead. Unfortunately the cost of labor is influenced by the COST of living.
If the super-efficient solar panels are constructed of rare materials that cost millions of dollars, then the higher efficiency will not necessarily lead to lower cost-per-kWh. The OP does care, they're just being realistic and not jumping to conclusions, which is what you should do when analyzing any investment.