3-Dimensional Solar Cell Reduces Payback on Solar Power Systems by at Least 40%

[kristopher]

Last edited Mon Mar 5, 2012, 10:20 AM - Edit history (1)

Solar3D 3-Dimensional Solar Cell Reduces Payback on Solar Power Systems by at Least 40%
Company's Super Efficient Silicon Solar Cell Featuring Wide-Angle Light Collection Can Make Solar Power Affordable for Millions of Users

SANTA BARBARA, CA, Mar 05, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Solar3D, Inc. SLTD +45.99% , the developer of a breakthrough 3-dimensional solar cell technology to maximize the conversion of sunlight into electricity, today explained how its super-efficient solar cell can reduce investment payback on solar power systems. These revolutionary cost benefits, which have eluded the solar industry to date, can make solar power affordable for millions of people.

"We have achieved these cost benefits with our 3-dimensional cell design," said Jim Nelson, CEO of Solar3D. "Cost savings come from two very important features. First, our 3D cell can deliver a high conversion efficiency of 25% using low cost silicon, which is nearly 50% more efficient than current commercial solar cells. Second, our 3D cell features an integrated wide-angle light collection surface that grabs light from a wider range of angles. Wide-angle collection allows our solar cell to collect light more effectively early and late in the day, as well as in the winter months. The result is that our 3D solar cell can deliver 200% more power output than conventional solar cells."

Nelson continued, "Because of our high power density, solar panels using Solar3D cells can also produce more power from space limited areas, such as rooftops. Because of wide-angle collection, solar panels using Solar3D cells will have less need for elaborate tracking systems that follow the sun to maintain high efficiency. Based on our calculations, we conclude that our breakthrough technology will reduce the payback on a solar system by at least 40%."

Though solar is the fastest growing industry in the world, it still produces less than 1% of the world's electricity. Most industry analysts believe that the reason for this slow rate of adoption is the high total system cost for solar. The DOE and others estimate that when the cost of electricity from solar approaches grid parity, or a level at which it is competitive with other sources of electricity, it will produce up to 20% of the world's electricity -- independent of government incentives. Solar3D sees reducing the cost of solar energy as a key part of its mission.

Nelson concluded, "Reducing the ...

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/solar3d-3-dimensional-solar-cell-reduces-payback-on-solar-power-systems-by-at-least-40-2012-03-05?reflink=MW_news_stmp


More information on nature of this technology at company's website:
http://www.solar3d.com/technology.php

[Schema Thing]

1. 3 dimensional - like Solyndra?

[Esse Quam Videri]

2. I don't see a picture of the panel in the linked story but

Solyndra was a cylinder and thus caught reflected light bouncing off a building's white roof. These are described as panels but until they provide a drawing or schematic who knows?

[kristopher]

3. It is nothing like Solyndra

Solyndra was a unique panel design. Panels are made from many cells, which is where Solar3D claims an advance.

To demonstrate the difference, consider that as the industry matures we could well see the basic Solyndra panel design re-emerge since it has some distinct advantages over the way flat panels function. And if this 3D cell design becomes the standard, those future tubular panels could possibly be made of 3D cells.

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. This is nothing like Solyndra (well, yeah, they're both 3D solar…)

However, the panels are actually flat. The 3D kicks in at the microscopic level.

This isn't exactly a new story either.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=310831&mesg_id=310831


http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/38616/

[font face=Times,Times New Roman,Serif][font size=5]Three-Dimensional Design Leads to Better Solar Cells[/font]
[font size=4]By borrowing a trick from optical-fiber technology, a startup makes cells that trap light to create more electricity.[/font]

Monday, September 19, 2011 | By Prachi Patel

[font size=3]A Santa Barbara, California, company called Solar3D plans to make silicon solar cells that are more efficient than conventional cells by borrowing the light-trapping concept behind optical-fiber technology. The company claims that its three-dimensional design will funnel light into silicon and keep it trapped—giving the material more time to convert it into electricity.

Silicon has a theoretical maximum light-to-electricity conversion efficiency of 29 percent, but panels on the market today are only 15 to 18 percent efficient. Solar3D does not have exact efficiency numbers for its design yet, but CEO Jim Nelson says, "We think it's going to approach silicon's theoretical efficiency. We won't get to 29 percent—nobody's going to get that high with silicon—but we're hoping to get as close as possible."

Solar3D's design will tackle two factors that bring down solar efficiency. First, 30 percent of the light hitting solar panels is reflected and lost. Second, many of the electrons created when light hits silicon are reabsorbed by the material before they reach the external circuit.

The new design has channels in its top light-collecting layer, which will be made of silicon dioxide or another similar material; these direct light downward, helping to eliminate reflection, Nelson says. The lower layer is an array of three-dimensional structures, each a few micrometers wide, which trap light by emulating the waveguides used in optical fibers. Optical fibers contain two cylindrical layers with different refractive indices that continuously reflect light back into the core. Nelson says this 3D structure will allow the light to bounce around until the photons have yielded as many electrons as possible. "We'll also put contacts very close to where that happens so that the electrons don't have to travel very far," he says.

…[/font][/font]

[Schema Thing]

7. ah. yeah, I've heard of this idea for years

nice to see it coming to market fruition.


I had actually forgotten (or didn't know) that with Solyndra the actual panels were 3-d.

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. Actually, Solyndra was a play on words

Their modules were cylinders/cylindrical...

Sol + cylinder = Solyndra

http://www.solyndra.com/technology-products/cylindrical-module/

[font face=Times,Times New Roman,Serif][font size=5]
Solyndra Cylindrical Module[/font]

[font size=4]Benefits of a Cylinder[/font]

[font size=3]Solyndra designs and manufactures proprietary cylindrical modules incorporating copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS) thin-film technology. Our panels employ cylindrical modules which capture sunlight across a 360-degree photovoltaic surface capable of converting direct, diffuse and reflected sunlight into electricity. In the industry sometimes panels are referred to as modules; at Solyndra, each panel is made up of individual modules.



…[/font][/font]

It was a clever idea.

[TheMadMonk]

5. AND STILL waiting for one of the twenty-'leven revolutionary...

...breakthroughs you've reported here to make it into an actual mass market product.

The solar panels on sale today are marginally more efficient incremental improvements on the panels sold twenty plus years ago.

[kristopher]

6. How do you know what is "an actual mass market product"?

[TheMadMonk]

8. Something I might buy through a retail outlet would be a good start.

Where are: the 600 x 1200 slivercell panels, proof against partial shade whilst only requiring a fraction of the silicon? The non-imaging optics that make galium, indium, (and other exotic materials) viable for photo-voltaic applications THIS SIDE of the Heaviside Layer.

You root for a technology which (the nebulous) THEY (for at least thirty years) have allowed us to have only on THEIR terms.

I root for one, which WE (you included) will only ever allow THEM on OUR terms.


Think about it. Please.

[kristopher]

9. WTH are you talking about?

[TheMadMonk]

10. Which particular WTH are you referring to?

sliver cell photovoltaics?
non-imaging optics?

Or accepting solar on their terms vs permitting nuclear on ours?

[kristopher]

11. I'm sure it makes sense to you

But I don't have the benefit of being inside your head. If you want to make a point on any of those things you've got to be a bit more forthcoming.

[Massacure]

13. I don't know about other people, but...

I want a solar system that reduces payback time... not which reduces payback...

[kristopher]

14. "...its super-efficient solar cell can reduce investment payback ..."

SANTA BARBARA, CA, Mar 05, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Solar3D, Inc. SLTD +45.99% , the developer of a breakthrough 3-dimensional solar cell technology to maximize the conversion of sunlight into electricity, today explained how its super-efficient solar cell can reduce investment payback on solar power systems. These revolutionary cost benefits, which have eluded the solar industry to date, can make solar power affordable for millions of people.

[Dead_Parrot]

15. Freudian slip, or refreshing honesty?

[txlibdem]

16. Bring it to market at reasonable cost, then I'll applaud

I, too, am sick of hearing about "advances" in silicon solar cells that never make it to market.

What happened to the fractal antenna cell that collected energy not only from visible light but also from Infrared light (making in possible for the solar panel to generate power even after the sun has gone down). What happened to the hundreds of other breakthroughs that we never see for sale.

This is amazing technology and I wish them the best... but put it out there for sale.

[OKIsItJustMe]

17. TTT - Things Take Time

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/39843/?mod=chfeatured

[font face=Times, Times New Roman, Serif][font size=5]Can ARPA-E Solve Energy Problems?[/font]
[font size=4]The young agency is popular, but its short-term research programs aren't enough.[/font]
Monday, March 5, 2012 | By Kevin Bullis

[font size=3]…

"In the energy sector, it takes time for an innovation to go all the way and scale and make a big difference in the commercial market," said Arun Majumdar, ARPA-E's director, in a press conference. "That takes about 10, 15, maybe 20 years. Who knows?" He pointed to other measures of success. The agency has helped increase private investment in energy, he said, noting that 11 of the projects ARPA-E funded—with about $40 million—led to more than $200 million in private-sector funding. He also noted the success of Envia, which has demonstrated a large increase in battery-storage capacity.

During a panel discussion with Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Microsoft founder and chairman Bill Gates warned that energy innovation moves a lot slower than innovation in software. "The IT revolution is the exception that kind of warped people's minds about how quickly things can work," he said. "If you underestimate how hard it is, that's part of why we can end up underfunding the kind of innovative work that needs to go on." He said that energy innovations in the past have taken 50 to 60 years to make an impact.

…[/font][/font]

[txlibdem]

18. I can wait... it just gets frustrating to continually hear

the same refrain from labs around the world: we've got a whiz-bang technology that will make solar 2x cheaper, 3x cheaper, 4x cheaper... etc. And then you never hear from them again. And the super technology they were touting turns into just so much shredded paper from the drawing boards. Frustrating.

So, that's why I say: bring it to market at a competitive price and I'll take a look. PS, I was talking to my daughter's boyfriend about this and he thought it was a very good idea (he's very tech savvy) if that means anything to you.

[OKIsItJustMe]

19. Personally, I’m somewhat skeptical

I think it’s a good idea, but there are a number of similar ideas, some of which seem to have less complexity.

I think that an approach which achieves a comparable increase in efficiency, while adding less to the manufacturing costs, will win in the marketplace.

[txlibdem]

20. Never heard of a good, cheap fiber optic cable

Me neither. Call me skeptical till I see it on the market. I would love to be pleasantly surprised!