Slashdot Mirror
Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon
Al writes "A team of researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, have developed a new kind of flexible solar cell that could be far cheaper to make than conventional silicon photovoltaics. The cells consist of an array of 500-nanometer-high cadmium sulfide pillars printed on top of an aluminum foil — the material surrounding the pillars absorbs light and releases electrons, while the pillars themselves transport the electrons to an electrical circuit. The closely packed pillars trap light between them, helping the surrounding material absorb more. This means the electrons also have a very short distance to travel through the pillars, so there are fewer chances of their getting trapped at defects and its possible to use low-quality, less expensive materials. '"You won't know the cost until you do this using a roll-to-roll process," says lead researchers Ali Javey. "But if you can do it, the cost could be 10 times less than what's used to make [crystalline] silicon panels."'"
"10x Less"? Is that like "twice as cold"?
for last 5 years same shit gets posted over and over again - Cheap solar panals
5 years later - in some cases panels went up in price
Don't tell me. It'll be ready for mass production in 3 to 5 years. Somehow, I seem to remember stories like this from more than five years ago, and still, nothing happens and the solar cells are more or less the same as always.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
Nanopillar Solar May Cost 10x Less Than Silicon
...and then, it may not.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
This may have made it cheaper with this innovation, but what if no one wants it because power from coal is cheaper, more reliable, plentiful, and so on? Cap 'n Trade would change the market (not technology) to make this new technology (and others) more competitive in the marketplace. That's the idea anyway.
If it really was that good, then why would they talk about it after they prove the concept first...
You're absolutely right. From now on, all scientific research should be kept completely confidential until they have developed a product that is ready to ship. After all, there's no value to scientific knowledge; the only things worth talking about are consumer products.
Stupid git.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
The cost of solars cell is low enough that infrastruture costs are a significant portion of the total installed cost. The quoted efficiency, 6%, implies that these cells would take up more area than silicon cells, and structiral support costs are proporional to area (I did see the text about possible doubling of efficiency). Another disadvantage to low efficiency cells is increased thermal loading.
Moreover, I don't understand the pessimism of:
Leave it to engineers not to consider the ugly realities of supply-and-demand economics.
How else do we consider these ugly realities if not to study available materials, test the limits of what works and what doesn't, build prototypes, publish results, and work towards commercialization... ? Other materials may eventually be used in real devices (either after a period of using the relatively rare Cd and Te, or perhaps well in anticipation of those supply problems). Even if the device, as presented, doesn't mesh up with the realities of current supply-and-demand, it is part of the process of getting from a problem ('we need energy') to economically-viable solutions.
Because you first get the technology to work with whatever chemicals you can.
Then you find environmentally-safe alternatives.