Solar energy from discarded car batteries

[SunEagle]

Exactly, high efficient solar panels lower installation costs since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. For
example if your panels as twice as efficient compared to other panels, then you only need to install half the number of panels
to get the same output.

Based on previous research getting a low cost pv cell to double it's efficiency is highly unlikely.

Sure the existing panel efficiency (~20 - 22%) will increase but the only way to push that % above 45% requires additional technology (multi-layered cells, light magnification, etc.) to be included in the production which in turn just increases the cost per watt.

What will help reduce the $/watt is to maintain an efficiency around 25% yet lower the cost due to cheaper materials and production expenses. But I do not expect the cost to go down dramatically while the efficiency doubles.

[Sunking]

Solar panels are a very mature technology. By definition a Mature Technology means it has gone as far as it can really go with only minor improvement mostly in the manufacturing process. Th esola rpanels of the 1950's are basically the same 65 year later today. 25% efficiency is the limit and we are at 22 to 23% now. There is no more room left for improvement. If you believe otherwise you are ignorant and as JPM put it just a mindless Tree Hugging Green Mafia Soldier promoting propaganda.

[J.P.M.]

Solar panels are a very mature technology. By definition a Mature Technology means it has gone as far as it can really go with only minor improvement mostly in the manufacturing process. Th esola rpanels of the 1950's are basically the same 65 year later today. 25% efficiency is the limit and we are at 22 to 23% now. There is no more room left for improvement. If you believe otherwise you are ignorant and as JPM put it just a mindless Tree Hugging Green Mafia Soldier promoting propaganda.

Don't forget the peddler B.S. part.

[Sunking]

Don't forget the peddler B.S. part.

That too, part of the Green Mafia blather and propaganda. The OP is a Card Carrying member.

[veritass]

And the fixed costs associated with labor like office expenses, trucks, insurance, etc. will be about the same. It ain't as simple as you might think.

As for panel efficiency improvements, that will happen, but not quickly and not as easily as you may think. The Thermodynamic limit on silicon cell eff. is probably something like 32% or so without fancy frequency/wavelength matching schemes or other engineering tricks. Looks like the practical limit might be something like maybe 25% or so for the near/mid term for something on your roof that's reliable. Current STC eficiencies are ~ 20% +/- a bit.

Most everything else is peddler B.S, or numbskull wishing thinking from non thinking and technically ignorant tree hugger types with ".You could just do this and voila - problem solved" attitudes.

There is an enormous amount of research going to into solar because the solar market is very large and there is a lot of government funding. Here is one example: "A UK company claims it can boost the efficiency of a silicon solar cell by 20% by adding a layer of the light-sensitive crystal perovskite. Oxford Photovoltaics believes that the efficiency boost - about 4% in absolute terms, but a 20% relative increase on the underlying silicon" Oxford Photovoltaics is commericializing research from the University of Oxford, which is one of the leading universities in the world.

Solar City is going to being mass producing 21.5% efficiency panels in 2016 at about 55 cents a watt. Solar is a technology which has and will continue to get better with time.

[J.P.M.]

There is an enormous amount of research going to into solar because the solar market is very large and there is a lot of government funding. Here is one example: "A UK company claims it can boost the efficiency of a silicon solar cell by 20% by adding a layer of the light-sensitive crystal perovskite. Oxford Photovoltaics believes that the efficiency boost - about 4% in absolute terms, but a 20% relative increase on the underlying silicon" Oxford Photovoltaics is commericializing research from the University of Oxford, which is one of the leading universities in the world.

Solar City is going to being mass producing 21.5% efficiency panels in 2016 at about 55 cents a watt. Solar is a technology which has and will continue to get better with time.

One reason I changed careers and became an engineer 40 odd years ago was because I saw renewable energy as a way to improve things. Another was to have a better chance to separate the reality from the B.S. such as above, which was and is always with us to snare the well meaning but energy clueless.

I'd respectfully suggest you educate yourself so that when you spread this marketing spoor around you'll at least understand how silly it would look if it weren't so sad and potentially damaging to the those who are also clueless and easily separated from their assets.

I'm about the biggest fan of R.E. and solar energy in particular I know of. Pie in the sky crap as above and wishful thinking that solar is the savior or mankind only hurts its faster and saner implementation. Those who mindlessly spread the crap make things worse - more mess to clean up. Cleaning up the harmful, hurtful mess is part of what I've been attempting as more than a hobby but less than a job for those 40 years, and most of the reason why I'm here.

Not meant for you as it seems you have all the facts, but to readers of this post, check the facts and do your homework - there are a lot of con men/shysters all too willing to make a buck at your expense.

As usual, take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[veritass]

One reason I changed careers and became an engineer 40 odd years ago was because I saw renewable energy as a way to improve things. Another was to have a better chance to separate the reality from the B.S. such as above, which was and is always with us to snare the well meaning but energy clueless.

I'd respectfully suggest you educate yourself so that when you spread this marketing spoor around you'll at least understand how silly it would look if it weren't so sad and potentially damaging to the those who are also clueless and easily separated from their assets.

I'm about the biggest fan of R.E. and solar energy in particular I know of. Pie in the sky crap as above and wishful thinking that solar is the savior or mankind only hurts its faster and saner implementation. Those who mindlessly spread the crap make things worse - more mess to clean up. Cleaning up the harmful, hurtful mess is part of what I've been attempting as more than a hobby but less than a job for those 40 years, and most of the reason why I'm here.

Not meant for you as it seems you have all the facts, but to readers of this post, check the facts and do your homework - there are a lot of con men/shysters all too willing to make a buck at your expense.

As usual, take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

LOL, we are just speculating about the future. The solar industry has already made enormous strides. Costs have fallen 50% in five years. For any fair minded observer, that is a big achievement. How far do you think costs will fall by 2020? If you are just some fossil fuel troll, I'm sure you will have no problem answering the question. How far do you think installed costs per watt for residential solar before subsides will have declined in 2020 vs 2015.

[Mike90250]

I can vouch that JPM is not a fossil fuel troll. But I smell a Wumpus ! The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize,
why make PV panels out of lead batteries, the battery industry already has a enormous recycling base, where old batteries are reprocessed into new, With more backup needed, the demand for batteries will increase, and lead-acid is the gold standard till LFP and other chemistries prove themselves over time.

[veritass]

I can vouch that JPM is not a fossil fuel troll. But I smell a Wumpus ! The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize,
why make PV panels out of lead batteries, the battery industry already has a enormous recycling base, where old batteries are reprocessed into new, With more backup needed, the demand for batteries will increase, and lead-acid is the gold standard till LFP and other chemistries prove themselves over time.

"The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize"

Lame effort to try to minimize the fact that installed costs per watt BEFORE SUBSIDES have declined 50% in 5 years. Why does it pain you to admit that fact?

[J.P.M.]

LOL, we are just speculating about the future. The solar industry has already made enormous strides. Costs have fallen 50% in five years. For any fair minded observer, that is a big achievement. How far do you think costs will fall by 2020? If you are just some fossil fuel troll, I'm sure you will have no problem answering the question. How far do you think installed costs per watt for residential solar before subsides will have declined in 2020 vs 2015.

The short answer to your question (and taking a somewhat longer, wider view than 1st cost) : W/out tax credits, the bottom line, after tax credit costs to selling prices to homeowners prices may go up. However, on a most bang for the buck, long term cost effectiveness basis, acquisition and long term operating costs will go down. With tax credits, 1st costs will perhaps decrease slightly due to mfg. improvements and other reductions in things like racking, standardization of assembly, permitting, etc. with long term costs staying about the same as quality will improve less than w/out subsidies, increasing maint. and service costs due to, among other things, crappy vendors still being around.

IMO, subsidies by gov. fooling with free enterprise via the tax system, or any other source of largess skews the market and overall does more harm than good. I slows progress.

Had there been no tax incentives (the U.S. ITC), the technology of solar energy, particularly cost reductions via process and mfg. improvements would be further along by now as solar would be straining against the fossil fuel competition without benefit the gov. push the tax credits provide.

Basically, solar would need to get strong or die. If a technology cannot stand on its own and compete, then it cannot, in the long run, help society. Free market Darwinism if you like. Or maybe like adult children living in their parents basement and being enabled to, in effect, become house pets.

The U.S. tax rebates were never about end users anyway. They allow producers and vendors to, in effect, raise prices 30%, garner a 30% extra profit, and sell a phony save story at taxpayers' expense.

It's a moot point, but I suspect if tax credits never existed, bottom line, 1st cost prices for solar would be somewhat higher than they are (but nowhere near 30 % higher), and residential installs would be fewer, but the product would be more efficient and the quality of the equipment and the services would be higher making the overall bang for the buck - the long term cost effectiveness - greater. In that sense and to the degree I'm correct in my speculation, R.E. and particularly solar would be farther along in meeting the goal of making things better for the planet.

Worse, that easy profit allows vendors and others who could not, cannot and are not savvy or smart enough to operate without the inflated profits the tax credits allow to continue to provide less than the best product and service. If/when tax credits end, those folks will be the first casualties.

BTW, thanks for the classy troll reference. I'll return the compliment and wonder if you are a solar troll.

FWIW, I probably forget more about solar energy than you'll know for some time to come. I bet I've also done more for it than some over the last 40 years or so. I've also spent an engineering career around and designing power producing equipment and energy systems both conventional and alternate energy powered, while on the side trying to clean up the drivel and spoor from the self indulged, hypocritical treehuggers who usually only make serious attempts at improvements in R.E. more difficult.

My apologies to those treehuggers who do not fit my above characterization.

As usual, take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[Sunking]

If you are just some fossil fuel troll, I'm sure you will have no problem answering the question. How far do you think installed costs per watt for residential solar before subsides will have declined in 2020 vs 2015.

Typical Green Mafia tatic. Without subsides, incentives, and forced Net Metering there is no Solar industry. It is a House of Cards.

[J.P.M.]

Typical Green Mafia tatic. Without subsides, incentives, and forced Net Metering there is no Solar industry. It is a House of Cards.

Green Mafia ? Too ominous ! I'd not give it that much weight.

More like ill informed, non critically thinking repeaters of what fits a myopic, undereducated, view of reality.

But, opinions vary.

[Sunking]

More like ill informed, non critically thinking repeaters of what fits a myopic, undereducated, view of reality..

Thjat is what I said, Green Mafia, Tree Huggers, whatever you want to call idiots and morons. Green Mafia is a lot easier to say than "ill informed, non critically thinking repeaters of what fits a myopic, undereducated, view of reality" They do not understand all those words. ..

Unfortunately the term "Amercan's" also fit your description.

[SunEagle]

"The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize"

Lame effort to try to minimize the fact that installed costs per watt BEFORE SUBSIDES have declined 50% in 5 years. Why does it pain you to admit that fact?

So what if the installed costs keep dropping? At what point will that $/watt have to be for someone paying less than $0.10/kWh to have a desirable payback? Especially if Net metering goes away and new connection fees increase.

Even if the cost for pv drops again by 50% of what it is today you are still looking at an uphill battle to get a much larger portion of energy generation coming from solar.

Unfortunately is takes more than a low price for pv panels to generate a high desire for people to install it. For most people the cost of electricity is a small percentage of someones monthly expenses.

[veritass]

So what if the installed costs keep dropping? At what point will that $/watt have to be for someone paying less than $0.10/kWh to have a desirable payback? Especially if Net metering goes away and new connection fees increase.

Even if the cost for pv drops again by 50% of what it is today you are still looking at an uphill battle to get a much larger portion of energy generation coming from solar.

Unfortunately is takes more than a low price for pv panels to generate a high desire for people to install it. For most people the cost of electricity is a small percentage of someones monthly expenses.

At $1.5 an installed watt residential solar is competitive with grid electricity without subsides for the majority of Americans according to the DOE sunshot initiative. At $1 a watt utility solar becomes competitive with fossil fuels. Solar City's installed costs are already $1.92. Technology is amazing in general because it gets better and cheaper with time. The boon to civilization of cheap/fast processors has been huge. The boon to civilization of cheap solar energy will be very large, especially for poor people.