Skip to content

Scientists make game-changing breakthrough that could slash costs of solar panels: 'Has the potential to contribute to the energy transition'

Technology
58 42 0
  • cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

    Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

    The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

    The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

    The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

  • First known electric car was built in 1837. Yes, 1837, not 1937. In 1910's and 1920's there were tens of thousands electric cars in USA and Europe. So electric cars has been here for a long time right now.

    First (known) solar panel was built in 1954.

    Yes, hence the name motor vehicle. His point was modern implementations of EVs and solar panels. 10-20 years is very common for transition to production. It takes time to scale up manufacturing and that's only after the manufacturers have actually decided/agreed to take on the risk of a new product line. Lithium ion batteries were invented in the 80s, but didn't see broad deployment until the 00s.

  • cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

    Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

    The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

    The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

    The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

    Solar panels are already quite cheap. What we need is much cheaper grid forming inverters so we can stop destabilizing the grid with solar.

  • "Has the potential to contribute...." Wow. Amazing.

    I like the understatement. Shame they spoiled it with the "game changing" claim at the beginning.

  • Solar panels are already quite cheap. What we need is much cheaper grid forming inverters so we can stop destabilizing the grid with solar.

    If the cost of panels drops significantly, there would be more capital available to spend on inverters, even if they stay at the current prices, still decreasing the cost of deployment. But yes. 😄

  • Wait for something fucking idiotic like:

    "U.S. government to implement 5,000% tax on new solar technology...."

    "also, revenue from new tax will be used to build new coal mines staffed by concentration camp inmates 1"

  • Solar panels are already quite cheap. What we need is much cheaper grid forming inverters so we can stop destabilizing the grid with solar.

    Grid forming will just mean the keep running the house when the power goes off, it's not safe for them to be pushing power when it's disappeared, that has been set by regulation in many countries.

  • I suspect that the lens makes the whole solar assembly more directional and the Sun moves in the sky.

    Commercial solar panels often move with the sun, too

  • Would the cost chart of PV cells look something like this?

    Even crazier that it's a logarithmic graph.

  • Wait for something fucking idiotic like:

    "U.S. government to implement 5,000% tax on new solar technology...."

    Solar is too woke and Marxist for the current US government.

  • cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

    Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

    The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

    The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

    The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

    The only thing slowing down the transition from fossil fuels to renewables is the same impediment it has always been: oil money protecting itself.

  • How does concentrating the sunlight like this not start a fire? Or wouldn’t this at least cause panel electronics to overheat?

    I would imagine they're not concentrating maximally. Just enough to increase efficiency.

  • Commercial solar panels often move with the sun, too

    The overwhelming majority of them don't, traditionnal rooftop installs don't either.

  • cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

    Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

    The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

    The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

    The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

    I wonder what kind of concentrating optics they use. Simple Fresnel lenses won't do, unless you closely follow the sunlight to stay in focus.

  • Solar is too woke and Marxist for the current US government.

    Real men burn shit /s

  • cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

    Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

    The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

    The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

    The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

    I'm not sure what to think about the Fraunhofer institute in general. They have made some nice discoveries/inventions in the past, such as audio compression algorithms and such. That is why i hyped them for a bit.

    But they really disappointed me with their writings on solar panels in the past few years.

    They said that the efficiency of solar panels today is too low to deploy them widely in practice, which is simply not true. They tried pushing Perovskite solar cells for no reason.

    I'm not sure what to think about this article's idea. On one hand, adding lenses to solar parks makes them significantly more complicated and therefore expensive to build. Also, if the parks have complicated physical forms, they're more susceptible to wind, and that could damage them.

    On the other hand, yes, adding lenses means you need fewer actual solar panels for the same amount of energy harvested.

    I'll therefore put it in the category of inconclusive inventions, together with the idea of adding a motor to the solar panels so they can track the sun. That would also make the solar panels more efficient, but also more complicated and more prone to mechanical failure.

  • I am not a scientist so please correct me if I am off base, but did it really take them this long to attempt to focus light onto PV cells using a fresnel lens?

    My hobby as a 15 year old was buying broken projectors to harvest the fresnel lenses in the lamp on top. They could focus sunlight so powerfully that you could burn shit. I didn't do that, surprisingly. I was like Marge Simpson, I just thought they were neat.

    i guess a lot of research projects are just there to give the researchers something to do and money, and i'm sure the idea of using lenses has been floated before.

    the thing is that it's not really as good an ideas as it originally seems. After all, you need heavy solid lenses that you have to install above all solar panels, and the cost of that is not negligible. On top of that, there's other problems that others have already mentioned.

  • My numbers were wrong:

    Hardware costs (module, inverters, etc.) are about half the price of the installed residential cost. The rest is "soft costs", and labor is included in it, but it's a pretty small fraction of it. The "other" soft costs are the big thing--stuff like permitting and planning and sales taxes. Better efficiency might somewhat lower it, but not a lot.

    Notice that when things get to utility-scale, those soft costs shrink a lot. The best way to do solar is in large fields of racks, and it isn't even close. The solution to this is community solar, where you and your neighbors go in on a field. Some states ban this, and that should change.

    Yeah, community solar parks are really the best because they remove a whole lot of these soft costs.

    These soft costs include:

    • bureaucracy (you need 1 permit instead of 100 permits),
    • nobody needs to climb on a roof,
    • shipping many panels at once to the installation site is much more efficient than only shipping 5-8 modules at a time

    additionally, any kind of fixed-cost complexity is spread over a bigger field.

    i.e., you should add circuit breakers to make sure the solar panels don't feed into the grid when the energy prices are already negative. adding that breaker has a fixed and constant price. adding one breaker to a large park is more efficient than adding 100 breakers into just as many households.

  • I think the point is that you can replace one big solar panel with one big lens and a small solar panel. The footprint on the roof is the same, but the implication is a big glass lens is cheaper than a big solar panel.

    the glass lens probably is cheaper than a big solar panel

    but the cost of setting up a glass lens in 5-10 meters altitude (because that's what's needed to bundle any sunlight) and make it storm-proof is probably more expensive than setting up a big solar panel at hip height.

    and considering that labor cost is a significant part (i guess 10% - 50%) of overall solar park cost, i guess it's probably not worth it.

  • Yeah, community solar parks are really the best because they remove a whole lot of these soft costs.

    These soft costs include:

    • bureaucracy (you need 1 permit instead of 100 permits),
    • nobody needs to climb on a roof,
    • shipping many panels at once to the installation site is much more efficient than only shipping 5-8 modules at a time

    additionally, any kind of fixed-cost complexity is spread over a bigger field.

    i.e., you should add circuit breakers to make sure the solar panels don't feed into the grid when the energy prices are already negative. adding that breaker has a fixed and constant price. adding one breaker to a large park is more efficient than adding 100 breakers into just as many households.

    Thanks. There's way too many people who don't see the problems with rooftop residential solar. Commercial/industrial rooftop can work out, but fields are the cheapest electricity you can get.

  • 32 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    J
    Oddly enough i heard that in my head with trump's voice. What has been heard cannot be unheard!
  • Google Introduced a New Way to Use Search. Proceed With Caution.

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    32 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    81 Aufrufe
    S
    I dont use google's search. I am unfortunate enough to have to take part to some extent in its environment but where practical and possible I refuse.
  • How could AI escape human control?

    Technology technology
    5
    6 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    32 Aufrufe
    Z
    Don't mix up country bosses with technology bosses - even if they have the same brain damages.
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    176 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • How can websites verify unique (IRL) identities?

    Technology technology
    6
    8 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    32 Aufrufe
    H
    Safe, yeah. Private, no. If you want to verify whether a user is a real person, you need very personally identifiable information. That’s not ever going to be private. The best you could do, in theory, is have a government service that takes that PII and gives the user a signed cryptographic certificate they can use to verify their identity. Most people would either lose their private key or have it stolen, so even that system would have problems. The closest to reality you could do right now is use Apple’s FaceID, and that’s anything but private. Pretty safe though. It’s super illegal and quite hard to steal someone’s face.
  • Is there anybody over here who can tell me more about smart meters ?

    Technology technology
    18
    3 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    91 Aufrufe
    jordanlund@lemmy.worldJ
    I should say too, that was almost 12:30 last night so you couldn't really see what solar was doing. Here it is at 9:45 this morning: [image: 4f578a85-5ef2-4975-a501-7deafa8c5c09.jpeg]
  • 54 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    89 Aufrufe
    halcyon@discuss.tchncs.deH
    Though babble fish is a funny term, Douglas Adams named the creature "Babel fish", after the biblical story of the tower of Babel.
  • 14 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    53 Aufrufe
    M
    Exactly, we don’t know how the brain would adapt to having electric impulses wired right in to it, and it could adapt in some seriously negative ways.