Posted on 11/25/2009 10:38:33 AM PST by staffjam
After years of over promising and under delivering, the solar Industry is finally starting to show some interesting developments which have the potential to make solar power as cheap as fossil fuel on a cost-per-watt basis within five years.
Getting us to that state, called grid parity, would require solar companies to produce power for around $1 a watt. Is it possible anytime soon? Many analysts think so and the target date being touted around is 2015. The reason for this fresh optimism is a mixture of technological development and simple economics. Traditional conductive materials make up 40% to 50% of the cost of a finished module. Newer conductive materials (including, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride and copper indium diselenide) only need to be about one micron thick, so material costs are significantly reduced. But thin film solar cells are just the beginning. Here are a few more examples of the most cutting-edge and interesting advances in solar energy and the companies behind them.
Solar Energy - from salt. Rice Solar Energy, a spin-off of United Technologies, is planning a solar energy installation in Riverside County, California. Salt - 4.4 million gallons' worth will be stored in a 538-foot tower surrounded by 18,000 mirrors called heliostats. The heliostats will aim light at the tower, subjecting the salt inside to such great temperatures that it melts, which in turn creates steam which then spins the turbine thus creating electricity.
Internet access - from sunlight. Late last year, Meraki, a provider of wireless networking solutions, developed a solar self-powered WiFi device. The Meraki “Solar” uses a solar panel and a solar-charged battery to provide Internet access in hard-to-wire areas. The units can be mounted on roofs or poles or anywhere else that receives sun exposure.
iPhone juice - without an outlet. Anyone who has an iPhone is plagued by the relatively low battery life, but we were recently alerted to a solution in that beacon of invention oddities, the SkyMall catalog. A company called Novothink recently developed the first Apple-approved solar charger for the iPhone. The $70 “Surge” is like an iPhone case, except it has a solar panel on the back. Just snap it on, and you’ll have full access to the iPhone, while you charge. It even comes with a cord so you can hang the iPhone from a backpack or your wrist while outside. It will keep you Twittering all day long.
While all of those devices may be interesting, the first question on the minds of many may be just how close we are to generating all of our householder electricity from solar power. The answer: Closer than you think. One Japanese company, The Seven Ryoju Estate Group Companies, recently announced that it has developed a rooftop unit called the “Eco Sky Roof” that can provide 65 percent of a household’s energy consumption from solar power. The roof works by creating a path of hot air between solar panels and a roof. That heat can be used to generate household heat and hot water, as well as electricity. The first installations are expected in 2010.
If Solar companies can stay the course and deliver on their promises, maybe a world powered by clean energy has a chance of becoming reality.
This article was submitted by www.OilPrice.com who focus on Fossil Fuels, Alternative Energy, Metals, Oil Prices and Geopolitics. To find out more visit their website at: http://www.oilprice.com
They’ve been running this headline every year since about 1973.
This may become economically viable when they tax the living hell out of current energy sources via cap & trade.
LOL. At least...
Someone could check this, but I had seen a figure that to replace a 500 MW coal plant, 60 or 600 some square miles of solar panels would be needed.
Exactly. I figure it’s better to get going on generating some of my own power to be able to flip the bird at gov’t when they try to control my energy use. Before they make making your own power illegal that is.
Solar energy is a self-limiting technology. You'll never get more than .15W per cm^2 out of it....that's the maximum solar out that can be captured at the Earth's surface, under ideal (perfect) circumstances. Roughly translated, that's enough to power a 100W lightbulb, per square foot of surface.
Solar energy is, at best, a localized "assist", particularly for functions that are not exacting. For instance, it's not critical that your Hot water be 140 degrees, at all times. If it gets down to 128 degrees, it's likely not the end of the world for you. Electronic devices, however prefer a solid 120V. 108 makes your TV look funny. :-)
“Skymall”, now THERE’s a source for your tech news ;-) The power required to run an iPhone won’t be replaced in real time by any kind of solar panel (short perhaps one that’s the size of your body and you live along the equator). If you’re willing to let it charge for several days for a few hours of use, maybe you could save a few pennies.
Personally, I think coal, oil, and natural gas will see us through for quite a while. They will only be phased out as we master nuclear fusion. I don't hold out much hope for the so-called "renewable" energy sources.
Well, my solar Christmas lights SUCK DEAD MONKEYS!!! Completely worthless.
108V burns up electric motors.
And holding the voltage up and allowing the frequency to sag will burn up a lot more stuff besides motors.
This is what the solar advocates just don’t want to face: they lack a viable storage medium to translate solar power into base load capacity. Until they can make that happen, solar power is the province of off-the-grid dwellers and “stickin’ it to the man” hippies.
So, doing some math.....
It would take (in an ideal world) roughly 3.7 million square feet to generate 500W. Or, 85 Acres. That's assuming that everything is absolutely perfect.
The best current technology is somewhere around 25% efficient, so multiply that by 4. (340 acres). And, figure that you only get peak sun, for about 6 hours a day, so multiply that number by 4 again (1360 acres). And, you need to figure out a way to retain all of that power, to keep the 500MW flowing when the sun goes down. And, that doesn't figure in any losses to deliver all that power to somewhere it can be used.
And, the best technology is hideously expensive right now - I could buy that prices will come down eventually. But that still doesn't take into account what happens when this hypothetical Solar farm, gets hit by a hypothetical hailstorm. :-)
Or, more practically, would you want to be the guy who has to clean the dust and birdpoop off of 1300-odd acres of Solar Collectors? They've got to stay clean, or else they're not a peak efficiency......
Solar - on a large scale - just ain't the answer. I've no idea why people keep sinking billions into a self-limiting technology, when they could be looking at other, "out-of-the-box" ideas. Heck, just revamping the delivery structure (power lines) could be done comparatively cheaply, with mostly off the shelf tech, and would improve efficiency dramatically.
It's "Sexy" right now. Of the "renewable resources" that I know of, I think that geothermal or wave power might have some potential.
I'm figuring that there will be something that we haven't even imagined, that will come along. Giant kite turbines in the jetstream, or a something-or-other that grabs energy from hurricanes or lightning bolts and stores it for months. Real Star Trek type stuff.
Problem is, there's a lot of very smart people looking at Solar or Wind, instead of ideas that actually might go somewhere eventually.
Because they are scientifically and mathematically illiterate.
Most certainly. 138V does the same thing, although more spectacularly. :-)
(Years ago, I got a BSEE, with a concentration Power Engineering. Unlike AlGore and some other Enviro-nuts, I occasionally can comment on this stuff in an intelligent manner. I actually started using the degree in my current job, which thrilled my Dad to no end.)
You said 500W in the very first part of your message. I was asking about 500 Megawatt plant.
I would really like to nail this number down. I appreciate the mental calculations you did.
FWIW, what I posted was a 1 minute, back of the envelope calculation. Your mileage may vary.
“make solar power as cheap as fossil fuel on a cost-per-watt basis within five years.”
Wow, a 1970 retro article! Wonder if they just got back from Woodstock? Did they hear the knews of teh Sterling Hall bombing?
At least it’s not power too cheap to meter.
What is meant by this? We pay for "power" ( actually energy ) at a rate per kilowatt-hour, usually $.10 or so, residentially. That's $1 per 10,000 watt-hours or $1 per 417 watt-days.
The wikipedia Grid parity article says, "The fully-loaded cost (cost not price) of solar electricity is $0.25/kWh or less in most of the OECD countries. By late 2011, the fully-loaded cost is likely to fall below $0.15/kWh for most of the OECD and reach $0.10/kWh in sunnier regions."
So what is $1 per watt ?
Hope springs eternal in the human breast
Man never is, but always to be blest - Pope
This Utopian thinking that wants solar panels on everything and their dog suggests thinking affected by hypothermia that comes from lying around in the sun too long.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.