Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement
« Back 1 [2]

Thursday, August 14, 2008

More-Efficient Solar Cells

Continued from page 1

By Kevin Bullis

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

What's more, the new electrode allowed Day4 to redesign solar cells to absorb more of the solar spectrum and convert this light into electricity more efficiently. Solar cells comprise two layers of silicon. For light to be converted into electricity, it has to pass through the first layer and reach the second. The thinner the top layer, the more light reaches the second layer to be converted into electricity. In a conventional cell, the silver lines are deposited and then heated to high temperatures, which causes the metal to diffuse into the silicon. The top layer must be thick enough that the silver does not diffuse through it and create a short circuit between the layers of the solar cell. By replacing the large bus bars with the new electrode, Day4 was able to make the top layer of the solar cells thinner, increasing the amount of light that can be converted into electricity. Also, since the silver can damage the silicon, replacing it with the new electrode increases the solar cell's power output.

The technology "sounds pretty exciting," says Travis Bradford, a solar-industry analyst with the Prometheus Institute for Sustainable Development, an energy research firm based in Cambridge, MA. The question, Bradford says, is whether the company can translate the latest advances from its lab to large-scale production without increasing costs.

Day4 has already started producing solar panels using its new electrode material--though not its new solar-cell designs. The company recently announced that it has the capacity to produce enough solar panels every year to generate 47 megawatts of electricity. These first-generation panels, which use conventional solar cells, have an efficiency of 14.7 percent. The company's next step is to put its new cell design into production and incorporate these cells into its solar panels, with the goal of improving their efficiency to 17 percent.

« Back 1 [2]

Comments

  • [no subject]
    hachi on 08/14/2008 at 4:37 AM
    Posts:
    29
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    10c a kilowatt hour? Sign me up, that's under half the retail cost of eletricity down here in New Zealand.

    Even with USD>NZD conversion, it's only 12.5c to 20c.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: electricity cost
      hador_nyc on 08/14/2008 at 9:41 AM
      Posts:
      4
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      That 10 cents per KWH is only for rural areas of the US.  I live in New York City, and pay 22 cents per KWH for generation.  Delivery charges are about 8 cents per KWH, making the total about 30.  But for apples to apples, 22 is about right.  Most urban areas of the US are closer to that, and some are above. 
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Bad number in article...
        Bob61984 on 08/14/2008 at 12:14 PM
        Posts:
        1
        Avg Rating:
        3/5
        Ten cents is the wrong number. 

        Ten cents is the *average* US price per kWh.  (Actually a bit higher than $0.10.)

        When discussing solar, either PV or thermal, one should use the peak price paid by utilities which can be 2-4 times more than ten cents. 

        Night time power is very cheap, often falling close to zero as there is more power generated than can be used.  Sometime surplus nighttime power is simply dumped.

        Solar does not need to fall to ten cents per kWh to be economically feasible.  It just needs to be in the range of what utilities pay for scarce hot afternoon power from other sources. 

        The author should do a follow up piece and compare the cost of solar to the cost of natural gas peaking plants.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • Re: Bad number in article...
          Kevin Bullis on 08/14/2008 at 4:32 PM
          Technology Review TR Staff
          Nanotechnology and Materials Science Editor
          Posts:
          59
          Avg Rating:
          4/5
          Solar is already competitive with conventional sources of power in some places and during some parts of the day. As Bob61984 points out, that includes peak power sources. The goal eventually is to make solar competitive with base load power all over the country so that it can economically provide a large portion of the energy mix, which is why it makes sense to talk about average electricity prices.

          Of course, ultimately we'll also need a cheap storage method, so that large amounts of solar power produced during the day can be used at night.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          • Re: Bad number in article...
            dsc22 on 08/15/2008 at 7:58 PM
            Posts:
            2
            Avg Rating:
            4/5
            We also have to take into the equation that the more people who start using this technology, means the less demand on delivered alternative, which a lot of the times translates to lower prices. If enough people go the solar route because the cost rivals today's amount of delivered energy, that may affect tomorrow's pricing and make solar not worth it anymore on a purely cost for cost scale, such as the comment about night time pricing falling to almost nothing, even though we know this is a business... delivered electricity will never be that low.
            Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: electricity cost
        msreid on 08/18/2008 at 2:28 PM
        Posts:
        6
        Avg Rating:
        3/5
        I live in a major metro area of over 250,000 people and I pay between 7 and 9 cents a KwH depending on my usage amount and the time of year.  It is going to be a LONG time before solar or wind can really compete with that price where I live.

        Here's a map with recent state averages from last year:

        http://www.think-energy.net/EIA%20Map_Average%20electricity%20cost%20by%20state_2007.jpg

        It it cerainly not average for most metro areas to pay 22 cents per KwH, and if you're really paying 30 cents per KwH as a final price, you're getting hosed and should start buying gerbils to run on a wheel and provide power, because that would certainly be cheaper than how you're getting it now.
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • [no subject]
    exushri on 08/14/2008 at 5:55 PM
    Posts:
    2
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    ps: we pay around 14c a KWh in Dallas Texas.

    I agree that solar power does need not achieve 10c per KWH to reach a point of inflection. The equation would be more like

    Current cost per KWh - govt subsidy (like in Germany) - carbon footprint offset (likely regulation in US after election) <= spot electricity rate (remember california power debacle in 2002)

    shri
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Price per watt
    isadikin on 08/16/2008 at 12:07 AM
    Posts:
    1
    What do you mean by usd 3 per watt? Is that price of the solar cell only or price of the complete system to function (solar cell, baterry, control, etc.)?
    Rate this comment: 12345
Advertisement

Current Issue

Technology Review January/February 2009
Lifeline for Renewable Power
Without a radically expanded and smarter electrical grid, wind and solar will remain niche power sources.
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News

Magazine Services

Career Resources

MIT Technology Insider

Stories and breaking news from inside MIT about the latest research, innovations, and startups--in a convenient monthly e-newsletter. Subscribe today
Advertisement

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Get Technology Review updates via the web, cellphone, or Instant Messager – Follow techreview on Twitter!

Advertisement
Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology