[1]

Friday, June 23, 2006

Large-Scale, Cheap Solar Electricity

A well-financed California startup is promising to build a solar-cell factory that could finally make solar power affordable.

By Kevin Bullis

smaller text tool icon medium text tool icon larger text tool icon
Part of a solar-cell printing machine in Nanosolar’s pilot manufacturing plant. The technology might make solar power competitive with electricity from the grid. (Courtesy of Nanosolar.)
Other readers liked:
•  Cheap Nano Solar Cells
•  Cheap, Superefficient Solar
•  100 Solar Megawatts
•  Cheaper, More Efficient Solar Cells
•  Solar Cells That Work All Day

This week, Nanosolar, a startup in Palo Alto, CA, announced plans to build a production facility with the capacity to make enough solar cells annually to generate 430 megawatts. This output would represent a substantial portion of the worldwide production of solar energy.

According to Nanosolar's CEO Martin Roscheisen, the company will be able to produce solar cells much less expensively than is done with existing photovoltaics because its new method allows for the mass-production of the devices. In fact, maintains Roscheisen, the company's technology will eventually make solar power cost-competitive with electricity on the power grid.

Nanosolar also announced this week more than $100 million in funding from various sources, including venture firms and government grants. The company was founded in 2001 and first received seed money in 2003 from Google's founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin.

Experts say Nanosolar's ambitious plans for such a large factory are surprising. "It's an extraordinary number," says Ken Zweibel, who heads up thin-film research at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, CO. Most groups building new solar technologies "add maybe 25 or 50 megawatts," he says. "The biggest numbers are closer to 100. So it's a huge number, and it's a huge number in a new technology, so it's doubly unusual. All the [photovoltaics] in the world is 1,700 megawatts."

Today, the lion's share of solar cells are based on crystalline silicon, which is about three to five times too costly to compete with grid electricity, Zweibel says.

Nanosolar's technology involves a thin film of copper, indium, gallium, and selenium (CIGS) that absorbs sunlight and converts it into electricity. The basic technology has been around for decades, but it has proven difficult to produce it reliably and cheaply. Nanosolar has developed a way to make these cells using a printing technology similar to the kind used to print newspapers, rather than expensive vacuum-based methods.

Although the company expects to start selling solar cells next year, ramping up to full production will take more time. Meanwhile, high demand for solar cells worldwide will keep prices high, Roscheisen says. Eventually, however, he says the company hopes to attract more customers with lower prices, in several years reaching prices that make solar-power electricity competitive with the grid.

Zweibel says the company is likely to face challenges in ramping up production, although their pilot manufacturing facility is a big step. And he adds that Nanosolar is not alone in developing inexpensive manufacturing processes for CIGS solar cells, and at least one other company is working with a printing process.

Meanwhile, Andrew Gabor, senior engineer at Evergreen Solar, a silicon solar-cell developer and manufacturer in Marlboro, MA, says current supply problems related to conventional solar cells are easing as more production capacity is coming on line. This could mean that prices for silicon cells start dropping again, eventually becoming competitive with grid electricity. He suggests that in the future solar electricity supply will likely be met by a mix of technologies.

[1]

Comments

solar power is great by Guest (J.J.)  06/23/2006 12:00 AM
solar power is the way to go, rather than feeding the oil barons.
The Wireless Battery in the Sky by Guest (Kevin Krejci)  06/23/2006 12:00 AM
Agreed.  Now that the costs are dropping, I expect we should reach the tipping point soon for many applications, and won't have the same old excuse that solar is too expensive.  (Even though I would argue, fossil fuels have been too expensive for many years if you factor in the collateral costs that we all end up paying for.)  I vote for wireless power!
Nikola Tesla by Guest (Aaron)  06/23/2006 12:00 AM
Your dream for wireless power distribution is shared by my science hero, Nikola Tesla. Wireless power would truly be wonderful! Until that time, I will be happy to purchase solar cells if they're cost effective and get off the grid.
get  mad by Guest (paul)  07/16/2006 12:00 AM
Aron, you said "I will be happy" to purchase solar cells IF they are cost effective and get off the grid. I know this sounds logical . However, the pressure of WW2 ( right wing nuts ) forced those in power( and people with powerful minds ) in the US to put great resorces at hand . I would hope some in power now want to move forward ,Bush and his buddies, don't look to helpful. I think we need to fund this revolution in power by everyone working and investing above and beyond what they normaly would. I beleive the abilty of the US to move forward when it comes to energy is key to our succes. Investing your mind and helping others to do so  now may change our future and help remove some of the power from the few.
Very good post by Guest (Patrick)  07/27/2006 12:00 AM
Education is very important here.  For when you educate someone about the benefits of renewable energies, they will in turn be impressed and educate someone else.

Great work here ladies and gentlemen.
Re: get  mad by CarlG  07/06/2007 10:33 AM
Why would you care which party is in office to determine to buy solar or not.  When solar is as cheap as other methods of creating electricty, people will buy it.  Keep politics out of it.
Erm- by Guest (Don)  06/23/2006 12:00 AM
Little power in this country is generated from oil. Most of our power plants burn coal and for good reason- we have huge coal reserves
[no subject] by Guest (Nick)  06/24/2006 12:00 AM
even better - coal generates more CO2 per unit of electricity than oil!
Solar cells by Guest (NJC)  07/05/2006 12:00 AM
Aside from the oil baron issue - and my pension relies on companies making profit -the main driver for solar PV is carbon offset. At present PV is the most expensive way of offsetting carbon so unless costs come down substantially PV is not the future. We need to get a decent carbon return for the money we invest so wind, wave and ocean current, carbon capture and storage all have a brighter future
Re: solar power is great by oconnellt  01/31/2007 6:22 AM
I agree solar power is an expellant alternative to fossil fuels, but I think nuclear power is the way to go for the next 30 years or so (until solar power and other alternates are made cheaper)
Read this web page for some enlightenment.
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/energy-fuels/dn9984
Incubation of clean technologies by Guest (Dr.Rajendra Jagdale)  06/24/2006 12:00 AM
We are loacted in India and anybody having promising technology in the area of clean technology or energy would be very happy to incubate such company in India. Call: +91-20-25693449 Pune
Incubation by Guest (Sachin Tiwari)  07/03/2006 12:00 AM
Hello Sir
Are you specifically looking for incubation of clean energy ideas or other health care related ideas will also be considered??
incubation.  by Guest (Sachin Tiwari)  07/03/2006 12:00 AM
You may wish to get back at tiwarisac@gmail.com
Economic Solar by Guest (Phil Connor)  07/25/2006 12:00 AM
Dr Jagdale,
Please look at www.sunengy.com This is a new technology ideal for India (and most other places).
Black Silicon by Guest (Erich J. Knight)  06/24/2006 12:00 AM
Hi All:

This looks to be low cost and scaleable for silicon PV chips,

Black silicon http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?rowid=1

But because of how tunable the process is, makes  my mind is swim on all the other potential applications.
I wonder by Guest (freedom)  06/24/2006 12:00 AM
how many people are going to need to be enslaved in Africa to mine the materials necessary for all these solar panels.
I wonder by Guest (Dr. Evil)  06/29/2006 12:00 AM
Fewer than you'd think.  Most of our slaves are abducted from Santa Monica and Santa Cruz.  After we work them to death, we dissolve their bodies in a proprietary enzyme bath and recover nutrients in the form of a green, wafer-like material which we feed to the other slaves.  It's not half bad, either. 
I Wonder by Guest (Minnie Me)  07/04/2006 12:00 AM
Great answer, Dr. Evil.  I personally like my soylent green with mayo.
I wonder by Guest (Mike)  07/25/2006 12:00 AM
None.  Silicon is readily available from countries that meet ILO standards such as Australia.  Other materials much the same.
Math Question by Guest (Wondering)  06/25/2006 12:00 AM
The cost comparisons (i.e., "three to five times too costly to compete with grid electricity" etc.) are unclear since the cost of grid power is monthly but solar is a one-time purchase. Are they saying the cost of an X kwh panel is 3 to 5 times the MONTHLY cost of X kwh, the ANNUAL cost of X kwh, or the cost of total kwh produced over the lifetime of the panel, etc?
Grid vs. Solar by Guest (Leon)  06/25/2006 12:00 AM
I have thoughts and dreams of energy independent living. I could 
install about twenty, 100 watt solar panels on my house, however after taking out a mortage to pay for it montly and comparing it with the monthly cost of energy from the grid and taking into account my solar system may need to be replaced by a more effecient system in 10 years, as much as I would love to get off the grid and go solar..... after calculating the cost I am going to have to wait a bit longer for my solar powered dream home.
Grid vs. Solar by Guest (Franz Kocijan)  06/25/2006 12:00 AM
We are living now since almost twenty years entirely off the grid on solar power. We have no wasteful plasma tv screen (an ordinary CRT may be replaced by a LCD in due time)or electric air conditioning. We have virtually all modern amenities including power tools (small mill and lathe included)together with an complete electronics workshop to make a living.
Stop biting your nails or seek  excuses why it is not viable. Set honest priorities and the risk instead of letting others do the dirty work for you.
But for heavens sake stop that squabbling. 
Math Question by Guest (George)  06/29/2006 12:00 AM
A good question.  Economists have developed formulas for determining the value of a quantity of money at some point in the future, or determining the present value of an income stream of a specified money/time.  These are called "future value" and "present value" calculations.  There are lots of such calculators on the web.  In order for a solar installation to break even economically, the present value of the money saved over grid power per month has to be more than the cost of the solar rig.  To be fair you should also put a value on such things as greenhouse gas and pollution avoided, space used by batteries, pain of neighbors thinking you are a geek, value of hot babe wanting to go out with you because you are so green... These things are called externalities by economists.  They are usually hard to put a number on and are usually ignored, sometimes leading to bad decisions.
Math Question by Guest (Scott)  07/01/2006 12:00 AM
I WANT my neighbors to think I'm a geek - that's a bonus!
Math question by Guest (Douglas Hvistendahl)  07/02/2006 12:00 AM
I've been working with solar heat which is viable now. In particular, search ("self heating" AND building) In PV, a combination of electrical and heat output is what I want. Solarwall reports 70% total efficiency with their combined setup, if the need for heat is there. Using annualzed geo solar storage allows summer heat to be used in the winter in a one or two story building. Voila!!!
Answer to "Math Question" by Guest (Bobby)  07/02/2006 12:00 AM
They are talking the total cost, over the lifetime of the system, compared to the grid.  As one poster noted, this is more complicated than it sounds because we have to figure spending a lot for a solar system upfront vs paying for the grid supplied elecricity month by month.  Current accepted ballpark is solar PV is 3 times as expensive as the grid. 
Defraying the cost: Standard Offer Contract by Guest (George)  07/25/2006 12:00 AM
In Ontario, they are planning to start what is called a "Standard Offer Contract".  The Province buys back power from the consumer/generator and the property owner can get a loan against the 20 year provincial buy-back contract.  This is already working in Germany
Solar Cost Question by Guest (Amos)  07/26/2006 12:00 AM
I have been trying to go into the solar business for years and the cost has been the prohibitive factor. Granted, over the life of the system, Solar can be cheaper, but instantaneous cost is so high that only very few can afford. The same reason why people take loans even if they end up paying higher. So, saying the cost at the long run is cheaper is not enough, it must also be affording today.
Re: Solar Cost Question by networker  01/17/2007 7:56 AM
The answer lies in renting the units from a company like Citizenre. They will absorb the costs of the production, installation, and maintenance. They only charge you by your kilowatt-hour production which is based on the average rate of your local utility. With net-metering, your solar generator plugs into the grid and your meter runs backwards in the day--you withdraw your daily surplus "deposit" at night. See http://solarforyourhome.com for more details.
Re: Math Question by globalweb  09/03/2007 11:38 PM
Does anyone know approximately how many watts would be outputted in a single day from a 10'x 10' fixed CIGS solar array on a flat roof on a sunny, cloudless day in the US sun belt.  If I know the answer to this, I can calculate the ROI and determine whether it is cost effective.
Re: Math Question by burnside  09/12/2007 2:28 PM
I agree the cost comparisons are not sufficiently transparent. In a real-world application, a St. Petersburg environmental attorney installed a solar array this past spring - a dozen Sanyo panels - bringing his on-grid power consumption to zero for a relatively large residence. The retail price tag would have been $20,000, but Florida rebates halved that cost.

My personal consumption averages $100/mo at about 1000KWH. An array suitable for my needs - based on the above example - would be less than $5,000 after the rebate, so costs would remain a factor for the first fifty months, i.e., a little over four years. The array's design life is forty years; it is guaranteed for thirty.

This leads me to suspect the calculations quoted here and elsewhere are centered on solar-electric efficiencies or some other parameter, but not on residential applications or real-world cost/benefit analysis.

Next time Tech Review covers one of these breakthrough solar technologies, a little number-crunching (and the methodology) would be most welcome.
Modified: 09/12/2007 14:35:24
CIGS is the wrong way by Guest (John)  06/25/2006 12:00 AM
$100 million for CIGS? Wow the pickings must be pretty slim for the VCs. We are they going to get all of the Indium or the Gallium for these (even if they are thin films!).

Silicon devices have mean time to failures measured in decades and efficiencies near 20%. I'd be surprised if these devices lasted 10 years with efficiencies over 5%.
Solar by Guest (Marco)  06/26/2006 12:00 AM
Who is going to clean the muck off the face that blocks the sun rays and brings efficiency down to near zero very quickly. This is one of the oldest scams in the con game.
"Muck" on Solar Cells by Guest (Bob)  06/28/2006 12:00 AM
I have used solar cells for over 20 years in South Louisiana, where there is plenty of "muck."
None of the muck has every coated the cells enough to compromise performance, and my system worked just fine throughout and after  muck-spewing Katrina. Ask the Coast Guard.
They use Carmanah Solar Beacons (made in Canada) on their buoys throughout the Gulf Coast, and muck doesn't stop the LED's from shining brightly all through the night.  Neither do bird droppings and guano.  Carmanah simply encases the cells and the LED's in curved polycarbonate cases that mucks clings to with difficulty if at all.
CIGS breaks the cost record by Guest (Gen)  07/12/2006 12:00 AM
Arithmetic is very simple.
Take Silicon battery and divide its cost by four (since the In+Ga content in CIGS is one fourth only). Then devide that cost by 50 additionally (since a thickness decreases by 50 times in CIGS film). So, CIGS seems to be competitive in the market, without respect of its efficency (even 10% efficiency will be great ! ).
nanosolar by Guest (brad brown)  06/26/2006 12:00 AM
Nanosolars web DOSEN'T list any specs. Usually -no specs =no products , or poor efficiency.
evergreen by Guest (shiftingwinds)  06/27/2006 12:00 AM
evergreen has been touted for their string ribbon design and is now in the production stage with 2 production facilities.  even if nano gets an impressive design to work, atleast 2 years before its viable.
Off the grid for ten years by Guest (Matt Falk)  07/01/2006 12:00 AM
It's easy to live off the grid
even with old (50yr old Arcos)
as long as you're not an energy hog
50 year-old Arcos by Guest (Greg W)  08/04/2006 12:00 AM
What is this?
Break-even by Guest (Stallings)  07/03/2006 12:00 AM
I'll feel better about the future of photovoltaics when it becomes possible to build a solar-powered solar-cell factory.
Carbon Emissions by Guest (Lee McClune)  07/06/2006 12:00 AM
Well, I have deveoped a New Crop/Process to produce Fuel Ethanol[Sorganol(R)] with ZERO Fossil Fuel/Energy Inputs, and have not been able to a penny from the Government to help get it implemented, and it is well proven, it a totally New Industry,
can't get a mqanufacturer to build the Harvesters, and they are not costly to build, been having to finance all myself,,
LFM
New Process by Guest (Bob McMullen)  07/08/2006 12:00 AM
I'd like to know more about this process. Do you have a website?
government by Guest (bob anderson)  07/11/2006 12:00 AM
its now quite obvious the govt. is in bed with the oil cos forever and beyond. dont look there pray to god and he will furnish the funding in due time.ps be specific in your prayers. if you dont pray you are the looser
Financing green tech by Guest (Jef Sharp)  07/23/2006 12:00 AM
Check out Jattra.com to see if they can help get the technology funded.
Keep up the good work by Guest (Patrick)  07/27/2006 12:00 AM
How do you go about doing this?

Stay motivated and persistant and it will all pay off.  Just takes extra hard pushing these days to get the train rolling.

GREAT WORK!
[no subject] by Guest (Hal Ade)  08/06/2006 12:00 AM
Well, if you can do it on your own, Mr.McClune, do so. If you put in all the inputs, you get all the outputs, income taxes notwithstanding.
Costs of PV by Guest (John)  07/10/2006 12:00 AM
Economically, one needs to do apples-to-apples, life-cycle cost comparisons, from mining materials  (and health effects to miners, never included in nuclear costs!) to eventual disposal of waste. Mindful of the de-centralization of many industries (e.g., mainframes -> PCs), the power and big oil companies are threatened by a distributed system represented by PV; a similar threat is posed by residential gas-fired fuel cells. The biggest economies of scale will occur when countries with no wired infrastructure require power; maybe China and India should invest in these start-ups!?
harvester by Guest (cosmo)  07/14/2006 12:00 AM
call new holland
Where's the nano by Guest (Dethe)  07/18/2006 12:00 AM
Printing cells instead of traditional silicon cell manufacturing is OK, but when I saw the name Nanosolar I assumed they'd be using the nano-crystal technology to bring efficiencies up towards 65%.

More on nano-crystal solar here: http://blog.monkeysign.net/monkeysign/2005/05/nanocrystal_sol.html
Economic Solar Possible Now by Guest (Phil)  07/25/2006 12:00 AM
For a technique that can be implemented without much delay, see www.sunengy.com.au . This uses methods that are well proven & is likely to be cheaper than thin film PV for many years. It needs capital!
Economic Solar  by Guest (Greg W)  08/04/2006 12:00 AM
The URL shown is not working.
www.sunengy.com.au