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
96 70 0
  • 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.

  • 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.

    What you describe is more like black start, providing power to the grind when it is down. This has to be controlled well, and only a few plants need to be capable of it.

    Grid following means something like whatever the grid does, the inverter injects power supporting it. A grid forming generator or inverter also follows the grid somewhat, but tries to get it to an optimal condition. This entails things like voltage control by reactive power, frequency control by operating reserve, fault ride trough capability and so on. Many of those are naturally provided by large conventional power plants using synchronous generators like gas, nuclear or hydro. For inverter based systems, they have to be considered explicitly. For battery storage most are relatively easy to implement, some also in solar inverters. The tech exists, but yes, in some countries the regulations have not kept up with rapid expanse of inverter based power generation in the last years.

  • 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'd like to know what they're going to do about the heating issue. Concentrating solar radiation carries with it an increased heat load. And heat reduces solar PV efficiency. I'm already losing about 30% in summer when the panels heat up.

  • I'd like to know what they're going to do about the heating issue. Concentrating solar radiation carries with it an increased heat load. And heat reduces solar PV efficiency. I'm already losing about 30% in summer when the panels heat up.

    This was my first question too! I thought heat makes them wear out faster.

  • 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.

    Hey it's those guys that invented MP3s.

  • 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.

    Just wanted to drop a comment.

    I love solar. It's the best form of energy that's attainable by the average person.

  • Adding to what the others wrote, solar cells become less efficient at power conversion (light -> electricity) as the temp of the solar cell materials (semiconductors) increases. So the issues is how to get more photons to the semiconductor without heating it up.

    Would a UV filtering lens help? Do solar cells generate more power from certain parts of the light spectrum?

  • 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.

    Concentrating solar cells have been around for decades, but I suppose the efficiency Fraunhofer achieved here is nothing to sneeze at.

  • 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 feel like this is one of those discoveries thats like, well duh of course it would work that way

  • This was my first question too! I thought heat makes them wear out faster.

    It does. Also seems weird nobody thought of a magnifying glass before.

    But its also the beauty in science. Now somebody else thought about it, and they might work harder to fix the next problem: Heat.

    If that gets better now, solar panels will increase in output even more. There are so many technologies going into one product, and each field have its own experts.

    I'm excited.

  • Hey it's those guys that invented MP3s.

    It really whips the sun's ass.

  • 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.

    well, adding lenses kinda requires motorizing the panels to track the sun, right? otherwise the "hot spot" is going to move around across the day/year

    is there a way to shape the lens to mitigate this?

  • 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 thought this has already been done. Guess there's some nuance to it that is above my understanding of it.

    Anyhow, advancements in solar are cool in my book.

  • well, adding lenses kinda requires motorizing the panels to track the sun, right? otherwise the "hot spot" is going to move around across the day/year

    is there a way to shape the lens to mitigate this?

    You make them convex.

    You can shape them that no matter how the light falls on it, it will align to the center. Kind of like how satellite dishes work but in reverse.

  • well, adding lenses kinda requires motorizing the panels to track the sun, right? otherwise the "hot spot" is going to move around across the day/year

    is there a way to shape the lens to mitigate this?

    Could have some refraction or hologram thing that bends the light the right way, maybe? Or like a matte glass that equalises the load.

    Or why not just use (big) mirrors?

    Won't help with heat ofc!

  • It does. Also seems weird nobody thought of a magnifying glass before.

    But its also the beauty in science. Now somebody else thought about it, and they might work harder to fix the next problem: Heat.

    If that gets better now, solar panels will increase in output even more. There are so many technologies going into one product, and each field have its own experts.

    I'm excited.

    They probably did, but like they said, the heating is probably the issue.

    I can see them adding a cooling element. Maybe even water cooling.

  • Hey it's those guys that invented MP3s.

    Lossy compression of sunlight?

  • 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 have not read the article yet, but I will be doing so after posting this. But from what I understand, concentrated cells via lenses already exist. The problem with them was keeping them cool.

    Going to go read the actual article now.

    Edit: Well, the article was very sparse on details. From what I understand of the comments, what's really been done here is making cells that can stand the kind of heat that would be focused onto them from the glass.

    I want to say I saw a video about this a year ago or so, but it was more solar thermal, where you focus a bunch of mirrors onto a single point high up on a tower, and it's cooled by molten salt. But as I said, that's solar thermal, not solar power electricity.

  • 738 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    85 Aufrufe
    K
    That has always been the two big problems with AI. Biases in the training, intentional or not, will always bias the output. And AI is incapable of saying "I do not have suffient training on this subject or reliable sources for it to give you a confident answer". It will always give you its best guess, even if it is completely hallucinating much of the data. The only way to identify the hallucinations if it isn't just saying absurd stuff on the face of it, it to do independent research to verify it, at which point you may as well have just researched it yourself in the first place. AI is a tool, and it can be a very powerful tool with the right training and use cases. For example, I use it at a software engineer to help me parse error codes when googling working or to give me code examples for modules I've never used. There is no small number of times it has been completely wrong, but in my particular use case, that is pretty easy to confirm very quickly. The code either works as expected or it doesn't, and code is always tested before releasing it anyway. In research, it is great at helping you find a relevant source for your research across the internet or in a specific database. It is usually very good at summarizing a source for you to get a quick idea about it before diving into dozens of pages. It CAN be good at helping you write your own papers in a LIMITED capacity, such as cleaning up your writing in your writing to make it clearer, correctly formatting your bibliography (with actual sources you provide or at least verify), etc. But you have to remember that it doesn't "know" anything at all. It isn't sentient, intelligent, thoughtful, or any other personification placed on AI. None of the information it gives you is trustworthy without verification. It can and will fabricate entire studies that do not exist even while attributed to real researcher. It can mix in unreliable information with reliable information becuase there is no difference to it. Put simply, it is not a reliable source of information... ever. Make sure you understand that.
  • 10 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    I
    So, China made their own copycat RoboCup competition?
  • Unlocking the Legacy of the Honda Acty Across Four Generations

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Amazon Workers Defy Dictates of Automation

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    84 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    T
    The amount of times the shit breaks down combined with the slower speeds means it doesn't really matter if they work 24/7 right now. Yes, robots are coming, but amazon has been acting like they will be here tomorrow since it's inception. The reality is robots that cost less than people that at least do comparable work in the same time frame is still a decade or 2 away optimistically. Amazon trying to force it doesn't change that. Amazon is to robots what meta is to vr. Dumping tons of money trying to force the 'future' today.
  • 19 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    76 Aufrufe
    Q
    PSA OP "wikipediasuckscoop" seems to have a personal vendetta against wikipedia. All their posts are various articles bashing the site.
  • 241 Stimmen
    175 Beiträge
    649 Aufrufe
    N
    I think a generic plug would be great but look at how fragmented USB specifications are. Add that to biology and it's a whole other level of difficulty. Brain implants have great potential but the abandonment issue is a problem that exists now that we have to solve for. It's also not really a tech issue but a societal one on affordability and accountability of medical research. Imagine if a company held the patents for the brain device and just closed down without selling or leasing the patent. People with that device would have no support unless a government body forced the release of the patent. This has already happened multiple times to people in clinical trials and scaling up deployment with multiple versions will make the situation worse. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2818077 I don't really have a take on your personal desires. I do think if anyone can afford one they should make sure it's not just the up front cost but also the long term costs to be considered. Like buying an expensive car, it's not if you can afford to purchase it but if you can afford to wreck it.
  • The bots are among us.

    Technology technology
    3
    2
    0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    yerbouti@sh.itjust.worksY
    Yeah she was on to something with the layers, but screw it up. I’m sure the models got better since.