Discussions

[1] 2 3 Next »

This discussion relates to Technology Review's article Efficient, Cheap Solar Cells.

• 
  protn7
  

  Posts:
  69

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  09/23/2008 01:26 AM

  Other risks

  The capitalists took a risk on their product; silk screened solar cells. Vulvox offers similar risks and similar promises. If you asked an investor its' well worth taking. That technology was shown to work in the lab many times. A knowledgeable investor would understand the risk was worth taking since there were already signs it would work. http://vulvox.tripod.com

  Rate this comment:
  • 
    lasertekk
    

    Posts:
    78

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    09/23/2008 10:32 AM

    Re: Other risks

    This are not the time to be using words like 'capitalist, risk or investor' on a science and technology site, with the second storming of the Bastille being contemplated by middle America.  There's a reason some of us took the science major route and stayed away from the filth and greed that was business.

    Rate this comment:
    • 
      Monsterboy
      

      Posts:
      89

      Avg Rating:
      

      

      Reply

      09/24/2008 11:00 AM

      Re: Other risks

      Like it or not, the science will go nowhere without investors to pay for it. Technology is the offspring of science and money.

      Rate this comment:
• 
  Gaetano Marano
  

  Posts:
  125

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  09/23/2008 05:03 AM

  >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

  I think it's BEST to use the wind energy since the solar cells need TOO large surfaces and the solar power plants STILL costs TOO much to cover the full electric energy our Planet needs every year: up to $15 TRILLIONS if built on Earth's deserts or between $3,000 to 7,500 TRILLIONS if built in Space ...like some crazy "scientists" suggests!!!

  Rate this comment:
  • 
    aymeric
    

    Posts:
    19

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    09/23/2008 08:01 AM

    Re: >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

    Gaetano,
    
    I would really like to know where you are getting those numbers. The last study I have seen said that it would cost 500billion (not trillion) to supply the USA with energy through solar. even if you are being conservative and say that america ONLY consumes 10% of the worlds energy then the cost for the global energy demand would be in the 5 trillion and not 15.(The true meassure of us consumption lies probably closer to 20 - 30%)
    
    Furthermore, if you get all your energy from these hideous wind farms that would have consequences as well. according to studies done by NOAA if all energy were to be gathered by wind turbines we would slow down the earths atmospheric currents (ie jet stream, trade winds, etcetera) This slowing down of the global wind currents would result in a heating of the tropics and a cooling of the temperate zones.
    
    Also, solar has almost no moving parts and hence the cost is pretty much only upfront. Wind turbines are complex machines that need constant upkeep i.e money

    Rate this comment:
    • 
      Gaetano Marano
      

      Posts:
      125

      Avg Rating:
      

      

      Reply

      09/23/2008 08:49 AM

      Re: >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

      I've based my calculations on today's world electric energy needs and today's solar panels prices
      
      in this table... https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2038rank.html ...you can find the 2005's electric energy production figures, that are:
      
      2005 World: 18,580,000,000,000 kWh
      
      2005 USA: 4,062,000,000,000 kWh
      
      my $15 trillions evaluation is to produce (about) twice today's electric energy (in future) with more efficient and less costly solar panels
      
      if the USA electric energy share will remain the same, only $3 trillions would be needed to power it with earth-based solar cells ...or $650-1600 trillions with space-based solar power plants.

      Rate this comment:
      • 
        Monsterboy
        

        Posts:
        89

        Avg Rating:
        

        

        Reply

        09/24/2008 11:08 AM

        Re: >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

        Of course, at that scale, the production costs alone would drop significantly. Then factor in that, with such a market, the R&D into solar would multiply vastly, resulting in a sharp gain in the rate of efficiency increase.

        Rate this comment:
  • 
    LDighera
    

    Posts:
    13

    Avg Rating:
    

    

    Reply

    09/23/2008 08:49 AM

    Re: >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

    Solar power, in contrast to wind generation, is a non-intrusive, clean, silent form of energy generation that requires virtually no maintenance.
    
    The solar energy at the Earth's surface has an average power of 89,000 Terawatt (1 TW = 1012 Watt). In comparison: the total average energy flux of all the wind available on the planet is 370 TW and the average global power consumption 15 TW.
    
    In addition to being abundant, solar energy is reliable and has an outstanding energy payback.
    
    With today's technology, a silicon photovoltaic cell produces 20 times the energy it takes to make the module. [1]
    
    
    
    [1] 1366 Technologies

    Rate this comment:
    • 
      Gaetano Marano
      

      Posts:
      125

      Avg Rating:
      

      

      Reply

      09/23/2008 11:16 AM

      Re: >>> maybe, they could be "cheap" if deployed on Earth, but do NOT send these solar cells in Space! >>>

      .
      
      the main problem of solar arrays is not its efficiency but its PRICE
      
      if and when its price will be (really) competitive, they'll be (surely) used for large scale power plants
      
      .

      Rate this comment:
• 
  javs
  

  Posts:
  89

  Avg Rating:
  

  

  Reply

  09/23/2008 08:31 AM

  Is this a Disrupive Technology?

  Mr. Kevin Bulls,
  
  There are many locations in the world at the very large market of the Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP), in which electricity prices are above 20USc/kWh. Rotating blackouts are a key feature at the BoP, because of the price controls business model rations electricity at the circuit level. Consider the EWPC article Electricity for the Digital Era, Part 2, whose summary states “It is very clear that we need electricity for the digital era, where retail competition is about business model innovations that will develop the resources of the demand side and enable demand elasticity. To transform local utilities from regulation or deregulation to EWPC we need to enable as soon as possible a transition to a complete and fully functional market on the digital era, under an EWPC Energy Policy Act,” can efficient, cheap solar cells be classified as a text book example of a disruptive technology once demand side price controls are eliminated in those unserved BoP markets.
  
  Regards,
  
  José Antonio
  

  Rate this comment:

[1] 2 3 Next »