Aussies publish breakthrough in photon capture efficiency.

University BS - which usually never sees the commercial world.

Like DARPAnet.

Which happens to be research - most of which dies long before the general public is even aware of the work.

Well - you are just a basket of puppies kind of guy. I guess from your theme, universities should just stop doing research.

Good grief - get a grip! For a doc your reading comprehension isn't all that great! Reporting research as fact or happening is stupid - though many people swallow the entire line.

Research is where advances come in - best place to look and learn - as far away from green sites as you can get.

Some clowns like to troll the university research dept web sites to report on the latest and greatest - they have no idea that 99% or better goes down the tube before it ever sees the light of day.

No one has suggested that. But there is a dark side to university research not many are aware of I call slave labor. University professors have an agenda to use university resources to develop a product or service for the professors financial gain. They use students to do all the R&D to bring a product or service to market, then leave the university to start and run their own company. There are thousands of companies that got their start that way. Companies like Solindra and A123 Systems.

Hmmm. I did research on Cadmium Sulfide solar cells during my Senior year at the U of D. Which could be considered slave labor since I was only paid a few bucks an hour.

Although I did get academic credit since I turned my research into a "Senior Project" and actually co published a paper with my professor to the National Science Foundation.

Still most of the research performed in Universities end up on the floor as scrap but a few ideas make it to market. Our CdS solar cells did not but it was fun doing the research.

misleading.JPGTheir announcement is misleading. The Aussie's method is through multiplying the amount of light, but he does have a slight enhancement in his cell tech; but this is still a 'band-aid' to what actually needs to be accomplished. Also, direct sunlight perfectly absorbed on earth's surface is capable of 47% max conversion -- anything higher would be done outside atmosphere.

All of the hu haa using collectors doesn't help Joe Shmo because it won't fit on his roof. Well, it might but it would look pretty bad!


2 cents.

This research actually has merit, and could reach consumers easily.

The project seems to be involved with improving the anti-reflective coating applied to cells that pass the flash test:


Much of the solar energy never reaches the cells due to reflection. Improving that coating is always welcome. That coating is actually why cells "look" blue - it is reflecting light back.

The researchers got those cells from Spectrolab, a Boeing company, and if you want to go into space with solar, that would be what I'd use.


Bringing that technology to ground level, *at an affordable price* would be of great benefit. The research project did not indicate if it was using specialized cells like CIGS or something that already has higher efficiency than most of the cells we use - but possibly shorter overall life.

So that is the key question: can you obtain this higher efficiency without using specialized cells and still obtain a 20 year lifespan with that improved arc coating?

Yes, agreed! someone I know indicated to me through his colleague actual method they used, then Stateside [as read] upped the anti with 42%.

As far as lifespan it appears you know a little something, so to answer your question: yes. You can, we do have/and use current tech that can increase the lifespan of even 'poly' to (what I believe) well beyond 20 years. As for mono, I'd estimate 40 years minimum but I would focus on optimizing a greater overall performance. By optimizing the cells construct we greatly decrease currently used manufacturing methods 'cost to produce', and increase thermal efficiency. (achieving a much smoother curve daily)

If the cell itself isn't going through the daily trauma of thermal variance (temperature rising up/down, up/down) it's lifespan is prolonged greatly.

Poly ingots used today are much better than the ones of yesterday( What the wafers are sliced from to create cells), but still current methods to manufacture cells are archaic. How you define what is a "specialized cell" concerns me -- every manufacturer calls their cell "Special". How they manipulate their 'Secret Sauce' during wafer processing is always special but their really isn't a need for the real expensive materials like Gallium/Arsinide, etc...

bands.jpg

P.S.- Your name here explains what's required to make this happen

I love the graphs they have on the site. By using the ARC method to 'match' P/N current they can achieve their goal by mapping out an averaged spectral conversion efficiency; however, what will they do if you increase the substrate(and intrinsic layers) in such a manner it will accept blue/green spectrum absorption? simple, re-write their algorythms....

Thanks! The problem is that there is a long road from the lab to production to sales and marketing. All three have to be in sync to be successful, you cant just "pick any two" - at least if the long-term is a consideration.

So real-world issues always get in the way, especially if the consumer is concerned solely on the initial price, and does not take into account quality. Now we're getting into sales. ugh.

A big shout out to the old timers at Wollongong (AUUG) and of course John Lyons - rip - but that's a different forum.

Cheers.

sync/ng IS the issue!!!

That road has already been taken from lab to production line [model] and PECVD chamber modified. Because the result 100 modules we/they made were so much more efficient, it actually decreased the cost to produce since output line cell efficiency variance was reduced to +/-1%, normally 10% depending on whose line your using.(China/Germany) and efficiency was above 26%

Just thought I'd let you know. Problem ? been facing is Syncing like you said, and I'm ready to throw in the towel. frustrating

ooops. did I just say that out loud? I should leave that part to those better qualified to publish.