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
123 86 1
  • 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 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"

    Why would I want to compare one panel's average efficiency to another panels efficiency in ideal conditions?

  • "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"

    Why would I want to compare one panel's average efficiency to another panels efficiency in ideal conditions?

    Marketing. Fresnel lenses are not going to do well with diffuse light.

  • Even crazier that it's a logarithmic graph.

    The scale seems to fit, but what the hell is going on with those tick labels?

  • 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.

    Banned in North America in 3... 2...

  • 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.

    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.

    how do you do this, actually? I'm curious about the details because I just watched a video on compound parabolic reflectors, haha

    a regular (ideal) convex lens with a single focal point will have the image move around as the light source moves across the sky. AFAIK satellite dishes tend to be paraboloids, which focus parallel rays onto the focal point, and if you change the angle of the light source, you'll start losing focus. Stuff like the DSN and radio telescopes absolutely do have to aim and track their targets (or are forced to follow the rotation of the earth).

    satellite dishes that are aimed towards geostationary satellites don't have to move (because their targets are stationary in the sky), while stuff like starlink tracks targets with a phased array.

  • Marketing. Fresnel lenses are not going to do well with diffuse light.

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding but wouldn't diffuse light be what it's going to be best at? While it'd be worse on a sunny day when there is an optimal single direction for the light to come in?

    It's the opposite of a light house fresnel lens - instead of scattering the light source evenly out, it'll capture diffuse incoming rays from random directions better and concentrate it on the photovoltaic cell? However it would be at the cost of being able to capture direct sunlight efficiently as only some of the lens would ever be in the best position to capture the direct rays?

  • 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!

    Or why not just use (big) mirrors?

    I mean, this is a thing with solar concentrators already, haha

    and for those the heat is a feature 😛

  • That was Fraunhofer IIS not ISE.

    Fraunhofer IIS and Fraunhofer ISE are part of the same organization.

    They are different institutes in the same Fraunhofer Society.

  • 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.

    Oh don't worry, I'm sure the capitalist system will manage to fuck it up somehow.

  • Yeah the problem has always been that solar panels only really like to operate within a very narrow temperature band. It's why you can't just plate the Sahara desert in solar panels. In theory that would generate loads of power but the heat of the desert is way outside of their operating range.

    There's been loads of ideas to heat/cool solar panels, the problem up until now has always been to do that without cutting into the panel's efficiency so much that it isn't worth doing.

    But there's been videos on YouTube of people cooling solar panels with plasma cooling and phase change materials for a few years now.

    Biosolar roofs work for rooftop applications

  • 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.

    If they could implement water cooling, and then use the heated water in a central heating station for house warming, it would be genius.

  • Oh don't worry, I'm sure the capitalist system will manage to fuck it up somehow.

    "If we allow german solar panels into america it will destroy our good hard working american businesses. Tarriffs on german solar panels of 69%!"

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

    With one layer the case is simple. There is a certain light energy at which the conversion of light to current occurs called gap energy. If the light energy is lower than that no conversion can happen and if the light energy is higher the extra energy is converted to heat and only gap energy remains.

    Filtering UV would be a loss but a small one.

  • 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.

    This is 36% MODULE efficiency with expensive cooling. 30% actual year long efficiency without it. Requires dual axis tracking. Seems heavy as its very tall/deep.

    Headline of cost reduction is very unlikely. Especially on a per acre/fairly large area basis. Dual axis tracking requires more spacing than fixed orientation rows, and loses benefits under cloudy conditions. While power at 7am and 5pm is more valuable when competing against high penetration solar, batteries are now more competitive than tracking, and can serve edge of day and night power needs. Tracking solar tends not to be built anymore, due to low cost of panels. The cooling infrastructure is also not as useful as it is on rooftops because the heat capture has useful benefits for homes.

    It is also unclear how this has advantage over parabolic mirror.

    Agri PV is a real use case, where more free land means more land use, even if most of it gets more shade, except around noon.

  • Maybe I'm misunderstanding but wouldn't diffuse light be what it's going to be best at? While it'd be worse on a sunny day when there is an optimal single direction for the light to come in?

    It's the opposite of a light house fresnel lens - instead of scattering the light source evenly out, it'll capture diffuse incoming rays from random directions better and concentrate it on the photovoltaic cell? However it would be at the cost of being able to capture direct sunlight efficiently as only some of the lens would ever be in the best position to capture the direct rays?

    wouldn’t diffuse light be what it’s going to be best at? While it’d be worse on a sunny day when there is an optimal single direction for the light to come in?

    No. Concentrated solar requires perfect alignment, dual axis tracking, to the sun. diffuse light does not concentrate.

    A reasonable alternative design would be cheap ordinary PV cells with outward bubbles instead of inverted parabolas that would capture off axis light better on a fixed tilt.

  • 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.

    I think their approach with module is 20-50x concentration instead of 500x, with cooling permitted to be module wide on air gap, as well as usual bottom cooling.

  • Adding to what Eldest_Malk said: They aren't just putting a new type of lens over standard solar cells, they are also designing/fabricating custom cells to work with the lenses. [I'm not a PV expert, but the fact that the IEEE paper focuses so much on the cells and not just the lenses leads me to believe that the lenses can't just be used with whatever standardized solar cells are on the market]

    The cells are super expensive but super small. They need cooling for efficiency, but if the heat moving is useful, can ignore the energy cost.

  • The scale seems to fit, but what the hell is going on with those tick labels?

    Looks like they wanted 'roundish' numbers.

  • This is 36% MODULE efficiency with expensive cooling. 30% actual year long efficiency without it. Requires dual axis tracking. Seems heavy as its very tall/deep.

    Headline of cost reduction is very unlikely. Especially on a per acre/fairly large area basis. Dual axis tracking requires more spacing than fixed orientation rows, and loses benefits under cloudy conditions. While power at 7am and 5pm is more valuable when competing against high penetration solar, batteries are now more competitive than tracking, and can serve edge of day and night power needs. Tracking solar tends not to be built anymore, due to low cost of panels. The cooling infrastructure is also not as useful as it is on rooftops because the heat capture has useful benefits for homes.

    It is also unclear how this has advantage over parabolic mirror.

    Agri PV is a real use case, where more free land means more land use, even if most of it gets more shade, except around noon.

    Solar panels as fences is what is needed.

  • Solar panels as fences is what is needed.

    Kinda works if you use bifacial panels.

  • 295 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    92 Aufrufe
    A
    I have a rough idea of their efficiency as I've used them, not in professional settings but I wager it would not be too different. My point is more that it feels like the rugs are finally starting to get pulled. This tech is functionnal as you said, it works to a point and that point is enough for a sizeable amount of people. But I doubt that the price most people are paying now is enough to cover the cost of answering their queries. Now that some people, especially younger devs or people who never worked without those tools are dependant on it, they can go ahead and charge more. But it's not too late, so I'm hoping it will make some people more aware of that kind of scheme and that they will stop feeding the AI hype in general.
  • Twitter opens up to Community Notes written by AI bots

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    44 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    55 Aufrufe
    G
    Stop fucking using twitter. Stop posting about it, stop posting things that link to it. Delete your account like you should have already.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 808 Stimmen
    152 Beiträge
    90 Aufrufe
    C
    Do you mean investors are trying to manipulate stocks by planting stories? Yeah, I think so. But intelligence agencies have whole training programs on how to manipulate narratives, and a very long track record of doing so. See: Israel's hasbara apparatus, GCHQ leaked documents on infiltrating and derailing socialist discussions, Church Committee Hearings, "The Cultural Cold War" by Frances Stonor Saunders.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    248 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • Digg founder Kevin Rose offers to buy Pocket from Mozilla

    Technology technology
    7
    2
    1 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    41 Aufrufe
    H
    IMO it was already shitty.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    P
    I applaud this, but I still say it's not far enough. Adjusted, the amount might match, but 121.000 is still easier to cough up for a billionaire than 50 is for a single mother of two who can barely make ends meet
  • *deleted by creator*

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet