Slashdot Mirror


Australia Engineers Set New Solar Energy World Record With 34.5% Sunlight To Energy Efficiency (unsw.edu.au)

An anonymous reader writes: Australian engineers have edged closer to the theoretical limits of sunlight-to-electricity conversion by photovoltaic cells with a device that sets a new world efficiency record. A new solar cell configuration developed by engineers at the University of New South Wales has pushed sunlight-to-electricity conversion efficiency to 34.5% -- establishing a new world record for unfocused sunlight and nudging closer to the theoretical limits for such a device. The record was set using a 28-cm2 four-junction mini-module -- embedded in a prism -- that extracts the maximum energy from sunlight. It does this by splitting the incoming rays into four bands, using a hybrid four-junction receiver to squeeze even more electricity from each beam of sunlight.

18 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. I love a sunburnt country! by Ann+O'Nymous-Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Bloody good onyaz! Big ups, UNSW! :D

    1. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While progress on efficiency is nice, the important criteria is watts/$, not watts/m^2. We have plenty of space on rooftops, over parking lots, and in deserts. But we need to continue to bring down the cost.

    2. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by Nationless · · Score: 2

      I'd imagine watts/m^2 very quickly turns into watts/$ when it comes to maintaining ever larger fields of panels.

      When exactly one is more valuable to research than the other is up so some particularly smart person to work out (not me), but both aspects are valuable to improve over the long term.

      Not to mention this has a direct impact on raw materials required to produce said panels.

    3. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is correct, but watt/m^2 is highly correlated with watt/$, because installation and maintenance costs already dominate the cost of the panels, and those costs are correlated with the total area of the panels. Higher efficiency panels are cheaper to install and keep clean. As the cost of panels drops further, you might naively think that efficiency doesn't matter: With panels so cheap, you'll just buy more. In reality efficiency becomes more important as the cost of the panels becomes irrelevant.

    4. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Or they could sell to a market where energy density is an important factor; like say LEO satellite manufacturers

      Hardly. For space applications, the current optimum is the OrbitalATK's breed of lightweight, flexible, foldable solar panels, not some sort of a heavy prism-based beam-splitting contraption.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by cnaumann · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The important criteria is no longer watts/$. It is storage.

    6. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Because the US has some outrageously high price points regarding installation and permitting costs.

      I was quoted $30k to install solar on my roof, and $15k of that was for installation, permitting, and administration, which seemed ridiculously expensive. I didn't realize that other countries have better control over those extraneous costs.

    7. Re:I love a sunburnt country! by tlambert · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While progress on efficiency is nice, the important criteria is watts/$, not watts/m^2. We have plenty of space on rooftops, over parking lots, and in deserts. But we need to continue to bring down the cost.

      You obviously do not live in the Bay Area.

      You can't lie the solar panels flat (they have to be angled), and if you have a flat roof, that means building up at least framing. Much of the roof space in the San Francisco Bay Area is flat.

      More framing means more $/watt, so an improvement in watts/m^2 is an area squared improvement in cost.

      In my personal area, mid-peninsula, I don't have enough usable roof area to hit break-even with the current panels SolarCity is trying to get people to buy for them so they can sell the property owners their electricity. A more efficient panel and two "power walls" would solve this break-even problem for me, but it turns out that once you are locked into a contract, they will not replace the panels, other than as a result of maintenance, for the next 20 years.

      A more efficient panel would be a godsend, but until it happens, I'm either buying my electricity from both SolarCity and PG&E, or just from PG&E, and the up front cost amortized over 20 years of time value of money actually makes PG&E the cheaper option (for now).

      Note that for rental properties, you might be talking 3 families in a 3 story building, and you have to fit the panels for everyone on the roof area that's pretty narrow, and pretty built upward already. I know of a large number of properties in the Inner Sunset and up towards the Outer Richmond, Sea Cliff, and Richmond districts that literally *can't* install solar panels without a zoning variance. It would make the building too tall to build the angle racks, or roof over the flat roofs with angled roofs, instead -- since the Solar providers won't guarantee against roof leaks, with an angled panel install, anyway.

      No, solar is far from a solved problem, and increased energy density helps a lot more in dense areas than putting a lot of panels *everywhere* in a relatively limited area.

  2. Feel the burn by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Still, I bet they were just beaming with pleasure, excitement lighting up their faces, coloring everything they said, reflecting their deep satisfaction with the realization of what was originally just a glint in their eyes. Their laser-like focus on area efficiency illuminates just what it takes to blaze through challenges like this; it's not just about brilliance, it's about focus and resolution. Clearly, this was a very bright idea, sourced from a rainbow of possibilities.

    [runs away, trailing frightened shadow]

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  3. Quad Junction? 4 reasons for Nope! by ShooterNeo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This does make for a nice press release...but there are SINGLE junction panels, commercially available, that can do 20% efficient. 3 more junctions is a much more expensive device to manufacture - cheaper to just make the panels bigger.

    Another problem is that right now, the wholesale prices for panels are below 50 cents a watt. The inverters are generally more expensive now. Effectively, quad junction panels just mean more watts per panel, which might mean less cost per watt but probably won't, but the major drivers of cost are unaffected.

    It's cool, it's just solving the wrong problem. The problem is there's too much sunlight at midday, producing more electricity than people need, and no sunlight when the weather is bad.

  4. caveats for the australian experiment. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    a device that sets a new world efficiency record.

    Although not intended, the device is slightly venomous and should be approached with an open palm when feeding. its normal operating temperature is in a 51c environment.

    A new solar cell configuration developed by engineers at the University of New South Wales has pushed sunlight-to-electricity conversion efficiency to 34.5%

    while technically true, this was only after it lept off a table and attacked a research graduate it had mistaken for one of the innumerable natural predators along the countryside.

    The record was set using a 28-cm2 four-junction mini-module -- embedded in a prism

    the prism, paradoxically enough, is extremely venomous however immune to the slightly venomous configuration overall. most of the wales team that installed the device are still recovering from a combination of intense agony and euphoric constipation. see the research study in the bio sci lab called "the prism does what now?"

    It does this by splitting the incoming rays into four bands, using a hybrid four-junction receiver

    which became territorial during testing and was found to be both predatory as well as bioluminescent. it occupies a classroom on the second floor and to date is consuming around a post doc per month. So remember, that while we now have 34% more energy here which is a huge breakthrough, we must all now add another item to the list of things to check for in boots and under toilet seats. sorry mates.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  5. Which record? by JaWiB · · Score: 2

    Alta devices has a record efficiency of 28.8% (not 24%, as quoted in the article) specifically for a single junction solar cell. This cell technically has four junctions, for which I'm not aware of any world records; however, Boeing spectrolab created a five junction cell with the world record for non-concentrated light (38.8%). I'm not aware of the records for spectrum splitting cells, so it's possible that Alta made a spectrum splitting cell with 24% efficiency and that this is the new world record for such a cell, though it's not particularly ground-breaking in terms of impact since it doesn't solve the major problems that make these high efficiency cells so expensive (the triple junction cell still requires an expensive substrate and an expensive process for depositing the films)

  6. Re:Explain in layman terms... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ,,, why if harnessing wind-power can affect the local climate, why harnessing solar power doesn't affect how long the sun is going to continue to burn?

    Anyone who seriously asks this won't even understand layman terms, they'll need neanderthal terms. And that's probably denigrating neanderthals. Ook. Grunt.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  7. Re:Not actually the most efficient by link-error · · Score: 2

    So, they run it through a prism... the split the spectrum... would that not be considered 'focused'?

    --
    -Unresolved symbol? Byte me!
  8. Re:Not actually the most efficient by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Informative

    So, they run it through a prism... the split the spectrum... would that not be considered 'focused'?

    Since focusing involves making light rays converge and prisms generally make light rays diverge, I'm going to answer no.

  9. Re:How easy are they to keep clean? by tlambert · · Score: 2

    Wont the prisms collect dust, and how do you clean an array of prisms?

    ACME Prism Polish(tm).

    The hard part is training the cartoon coyotes to apply it for you, rather than them converting your installation into a giant, solar, anti-roadrunner death beam.

  10. Re:Quad Junction? 4 reasons for Nope! by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

    Maybe one day we'll invent a way of storing the energy for use later in the day.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  11. Newscorp headline: by cas2000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Taxpayer-Funded Terrorists Attempt to Sabotage Vital Coal Industry