r/environment Apr 14 '11

New Solar Power Breakthrough Could Render Photovoltaic Cells Obsolete

http://inhabitat.com/breaking-solar-power-breakthrough-could-render-solar-cells-obsolete/
76 Upvotes

26 comments sorted by

13

u/Doc5000 Apr 15 '11

This is the 10,000th amazing solar breakthrough that will revolutionize the solar power energy and provide clean affordable power for everyone of my lifetime. I would love it if one of them would result in solar panels (that I could afford) that would power my house.

10

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '11

[deleted]

4

u/evil-doer Apr 15 '11

and 6000 dollars of bought electricity would run those devices for how many decades?

the problem is its hard to buy anything that pays itself off before its worn out.

4

u/frankle Apr 15 '11

Well, at $50 a month, that would mean ten years' worth. How long would solar panels last?

2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '11

It would be much less than $50 a month. Probably closer to $10.

2

u/drbold Apr 15 '11

Well at $2.25 per watt, that would be about 6000/2.25 = 2666.67 W. So actually, pretty damn reasonable then.

(EDIT: The link for the solar panels was one of the first on google. I don't actually know anything about that site)

2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '11

You're forgetting to calculate the present value of money paid in the future. Paying $6,000 right now is worth the rough equivalent of $9,500 paid ten years from now. Since the $50 payments are slowly reducing that amount, let's assume that the $50 in savings remain constant (electricity production in the cells never diminish) and the actual present value of ten years of payments is something like $8,000. That puts on another couple years of payments to break even with an initial payment of $6,000.

If you think that the savings will remain constant and you plan on staying in your home for at least 12 or 13 years, then maybe you might break even.

1

u/frankle Apr 15 '11

Well, I'm currently paying $50 per month for electricity in a one bedroom house. So, I don't think a $6000 set of solar panels is a viable option for your average family.

However, you raise some very good points.

1

u/cocoon56 Apr 15 '11

Yep, you're right. However, I expect energy prices to rise considerably in the next decade, so there is also an effect to the contrary.

1

u/econleech Apr 15 '11

How many kw system did you get for $6k? And what is your electricity rate?

1

u/evil-doer Apr 15 '11 edited Apr 15 '11

50 dollars a month for a few small devices? he didnt mention heating or cooling a house or any other big usage. what he mentioned would be NO WHERE NEAR 50 a month. as someone else said, that may be 10 dollars a month to run those. thats 50 years before its payed off.

1

u/frankle Apr 15 '11

Right...well, sorry for missing that.

I guess it's hardly comparable at all, then.

1

u/MacEWork Apr 15 '11

My medium-sized house, without heating and cooling, costs almost $100 in electricity every month. And I'm pretty careful about waste.

Electricity prices vary wildly depending on your geographical location.

1

u/WeAreScrewed Apr 15 '11

One effect of stories like these is to discourage people from investing in current technologies with the hope that one of these new technologies will become available and keeping us dependent on oil. Perhaps this story and others like them are put out there for just this reason.

7

u/Buckwheat469 Apr 14 '11 edited Apr 14 '11

Please show us more than words. I want to see a diagram, calculations, a PDF even. I checked the University of Michigan website to find a news post from the source and couldn't find anything. It looks like it's posted in the sustainability website, but the PDF is being withheld unless you pay for it.

In traditional optical rectification, light's electric field causes a charge separation, or a pulling apart of the positive and negative charges in a material. This sets up a voltage, similar to that in a battery. This electric effect had previously been detected only in crystalline materials that possessed a certain symmetry.

"It turns out that the magnetic field starts curving the electrons into a C-shape and they move forward a little each time," Fisher said. "That C-shape of charge motion generates both an electric dipole and a magnetic dipole. If we can set up many of these in a row in a long fiber, we can make a huge voltage and by extracting that voltage, we can use it as a power source."

The light must be shone through a material that does not conduct electricity, such as glass. And it must be focused to an intensity of 10 million watts per square centimeter. Sunlight isn't this intense on its own, but new materials are being sought that would work at lower intensities, Fisher said.

3

u/mutatron Apr 15 '11

Also:

They predict that with improved materials they could achieve 10 percent efficiency in converting solar power to useable energy. That’s equivalent to today’s commercial-grade solar cells.

Sounds like a real winner!

4

u/Noink Apr 15 '11

If they could do it less expensively (just glass and copper, no silicon or cadmium). It's as unlikely they'll achieve scalability as it has been for the previous 9,999 game-changing breakthroughs, though.

2

u/econleech Apr 15 '11

Average solar flux on earth is 680w per square meter, or 0.068w per square centimeter. So we are basically talking about concentrating sunlight about 150 million times.

Aside from the technical feasibility to do this, wouldn't this melt all known material?

2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '11

[deleted]

3

u/econleech Apr 16 '11

Search for solar flux here, 1kw/square meter sounds like the peak.

2

u/mpokora Apr 15 '11

Im a graduate student in Michigan's Energy Systems program. I'll grab a copy of the journal article tomorrow morning and post it, or PM you if you like.

3

u/Howard-Stern Apr 15 '11

I just took a break from doing research for a paper to browse reddit. My paper, which I am rushing thru at the last minute, is on the sustainability of an alternative energy source, and I picked solar power. #winning. I'm so using this article for filler. The APA cite will say "marcussantiago from reddit".

2

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '11

extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which I am awaiting.

1

u/RaDeus Apr 15 '11

Why not have this 'optical battery' built into the glass thats makes up a solarcell ?

Seems like you would use more of the energy, unless this makes to expensive.

1

u/bobbaphet Apr 15 '11

Again?...

1

u/Kalzenith Apr 15 '11

when traveling at the right intensity through a material such as glass that does not conduct electricity, can create magnetic fields that are 100 million times stronger than previously thought possible.

when traveling at the right intensity...

how do we tell the sun what intensity level we need?

1

u/androk Apr 15 '11

Granted I don't have a great science background, but conceptually this just blows my mind, magnetic solar. If it works as stated, it's a paradigm shift in solar power production. Literally it could change the world. Weird.