Solar energy from discarded car batteries

[veritass]

I can vouch that JPM is not a fossil fuel troll. But I smell a Wumpus ! The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize,
why make PV panels out of lead batteries, the battery industry already has a enormous recycling base, where old batteries are reprocessed into new, With more backup needed, the demand for batteries will increase, and lead-acid is the gold standard till LFP and other chemistries prove themselves over time.

"The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize"

Lame effort to try to minimize the fact that installed costs per watt BEFORE SUBSIDES have declined 50% in 5 years. Why does it pain you to admit that fact?

[Mike90250]

I can vouch that JPM is not a fossil fuel troll. But I smell a Wumpus ! The costs now are skewed by governmental subsidies, when they go away, the true costs will stabilize,
why make PV panels out of lead batteries, the battery industry already has a enormous recycling base, where old batteries are reprocessed into new, With more backup needed, the demand for batteries will increase, and lead-acid is the gold standard till LFP and other chemistries prove themselves over time.

[veritass]

One reason I changed careers and became an engineer 40 odd years ago was because I saw renewable energy as a way to improve things. Another was to have a better chance to separate the reality from the B.S. such as above, which was and is always with us to snare the well meaning but energy clueless.

I'd respectfully suggest you educate yourself so that when you spread this marketing spoor around you'll at least understand how silly it would look if it weren't so sad and potentially damaging to the those who are also clueless and easily separated from their assets.

I'm about the biggest fan of R.E. and solar energy in particular I know of. Pie in the sky crap as above and wishful thinking that solar is the savior or mankind only hurts its faster and saner implementation. Those who mindlessly spread the crap make things worse - more mess to clean up. Cleaning up the harmful, hurtful mess is part of what I've been attempting as more than a hobby but less than a job for those 40 years, and most of the reason why I'm here.

Not meant for you as it seems you have all the facts, but to readers of this post, check the facts and do your homework - there are a lot of con men/shysters all too willing to make a buck at your expense.

As usual, take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

LOL, we are just speculating about the future. The solar industry has already made enormous strides. Costs have fallen 50% in five years. For any fair minded observer, that is a big achievement. How far do you think costs will fall by 2020? If you are just some fossil fuel troll, I'm sure you will have no problem answering the question. How far do you think installed costs per watt for residential solar before subsides will have declined in 2020 vs 2015.

[J.P.M.]

There is an enormous amount of research going to into solar because the solar market is very large and there is a lot of government funding. Here is one example: "A UK company claims it can boost the efficiency of a silicon solar cell by 20% by adding a layer of the light-sensitive crystal perovskite. Oxford Photovoltaics believes that the efficiency boost - about 4% in absolute terms, but a 20% relative increase on the underlying silicon" Oxford Photovoltaics is commericializing research from the University of Oxford, which is one of the leading universities in the world.

Solar City is going to being mass producing 21.5% efficiency panels in 2016 at about 55 cents a watt. Solar is a technology which has and will continue to get better with time.

One reason I changed careers and became an engineer 40 odd years ago was because I saw renewable energy as a way to improve things. Another was to have a better chance to separate the reality from the B.S. such as above, which was and is always with us to snare the well meaning but energy clueless.

I'd respectfully suggest you educate yourself so that when you spread this marketing spoor around you'll at least understand how silly it would look if it weren't so sad and potentially damaging to the those who are also clueless and easily separated from their assets.

I'm about the biggest fan of R.E. and solar energy in particular I know of. Pie in the sky crap as above and wishful thinking that solar is the savior or mankind only hurts its faster and saner implementation. Those who mindlessly spread the crap make things worse - more mess to clean up. Cleaning up the harmful, hurtful mess is part of what I've been attempting as more than a hobby but less than a job for those 40 years, and most of the reason why I'm here.

Not meant for you as it seems you have all the facts, but to readers of this post, check the facts and do your homework - there are a lot of con men/shysters all too willing to make a buck at your expense.

As usual, take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[veritass]

And the fixed costs associated with labor like office expenses, trucks, insurance, etc. will be about the same. It ain't as simple as you might think.

As for panel efficiency improvements, that will happen, but not quickly and not as easily as you may think. The Thermodynamic limit on silicon cell eff. is probably something like 32% or so without fancy frequency/wavelength matching schemes or other engineering tricks. Looks like the practical limit might be something like maybe 25% or so for the near/mid term for something on your roof that's reliable. Current STC eficiencies are ~ 20% +/- a bit.

Most everything else is peddler B.S, or numbskull wishing thinking from non thinking and technically ignorant tree hugger types with ".You could just do this and voila - problem solved" attitudes.

There is an enormous amount of research going to into solar because the solar market is very large and there is a lot of government funding. Here is one example: "A UK company claims it can boost the efficiency of a silicon solar cell by 20% by adding a layer of the light-sensitive crystal perovskite. Oxford Photovoltaics believes that the efficiency boost - about 4% in absolute terms, but a 20% relative increase on the underlying silicon" Oxford Photovoltaics is commericializing research from the University of Oxford, which is one of the leading universities in the world.

Solar City is going to being mass producing 21.5% efficiency panels in 2016 at about 55 cents a watt. Solar is a technology which has and will continue to get better with time.

[Sunking]

Don't forget the peddler B.S. part.

That too, part of the Green Mafia blather and propaganda. The OP is a Card Carrying member.

[J.P.M.]

Solar panels are a very mature technology. By definition a Mature Technology means it has gone as far as it can really go with only minor improvement mostly in the manufacturing process. Th esola rpanels of the 1950's are basically the same 65 year later today. 25% efficiency is the limit and we are at 22 to 23% now. There is no more room left for improvement. If you believe otherwise you are ignorant and as JPM put it just a mindless Tree Hugging Green Mafia Soldier promoting propaganda.

Don't forget the peddler B.S. part.

[Sunking]

Solar panels are a very mature technology. By definition a Mature Technology means it has gone as far as it can really go with only minor improvement mostly in the manufacturing process. Th esola rpanels of the 1950's are basically the same 65 year later today. 25% efficiency is the limit and we are at 22 to 23% now. There is no more room left for improvement. If you believe otherwise you are ignorant and as JPM put it just a mindless Tree Hugging Green Mafia Soldier promoting propaganda.

[SunEagle]

Exactly, high efficient solar panels lower installation costs since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. For
example if your panels as twice as efficient compared to other panels, then you only need to install half the number of panels
to get the same output.

Based on previous research getting a low cost pv cell to double it's efficiency is highly unlikely.

Sure the existing panel efficiency (~20 - 22%) will increase but the only way to push that % above 45% requires additional technology (multi-layered cells, light magnification, etc.) to be included in the production which in turn just increases the cost per watt.

What will help reduce the $/watt is to maintain an efficiency around 25% yet lower the cost due to cheaper materials and production expenses. But I do not expect the cost to go down dramatically while the efficiency doubles.

[J.P.M.]

Exactly, high efficient solar panels lower installation costs since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. For
example if your panels as twice as efficient compared to other panels, then you only need to install half the number of panels
to get the same output.

And the fixed costs associated with labor like office expenses, trucks, insurance, etc. will be about the same. It ain't as simple as you might think.

As for panel efficiency improvements, that will happen, but not quickly and not as easily as you may think. The Thermodynamic limit on silicon cell eff. is probably something like 32% or so without fancy frequency/wavelength matching schemes or other engineering tricks. Looks like the practical limit might be something like maybe 25% or so for the near/mid term for something on your roof that's reliable. Current STC eficiencies are ~ 20% +/- a bit.

Most everything else is peddler B.S, or numbskull wishing thinking from non thinking and technically ignorant tree hugger types with ".You could just do this and voila - problem solved" attitudes.

[veritass]

Even if solar panels get down to 50 cents a watt, the majority of the cost will be in the labor to install the system.

Exactly, high efficient solar panels lower installation costs since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. For
example if your panels as twice as efficient compared to other panels, then you only need to install half the number of panels
to get the same output.

[SunEagle]

Solar panels are a technology which get better and cheaper with time. Cost have declined 50% in 5 years and cost are projected to continue falling. Efficiency should continue to rise year by year as it has in the past. More efficient solar panels also lower the balance of systems cost since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. Of course not all research reaches commericialization, but some research efforts do. Solar is gong to be very cheap in the future.

Even if solar panels get down to 50 cents a watt, the majority of the cost will be in the labor to install the system.

[veritass]

MIT researchers have developed a simple procedure for making a promising type of solar cell using lead recovered from discarded lead-acid car batteries — a practice that could benefit both the environment and human health. As new lead-free car batteries come into use, old batteries would be sent to the solar industry rather than to landfills. And if production of this new, high-efficiency, low-cost solar cell takes off — as many experts think it will — manufacturers’ increased demand for lead could be met without additional lead mining and smelting. Laboratory experiments confirm that solar cells made with recycled lead work just as well as those made with high-purity, commercially available starting materials. Battery recycling could thus support production of these novel solar cells while researchers work to replace the lead with a more benign but equally effective material.

Solar panels are a technology which get better and cheaper with time. Cost have declined 50% in 5 years and cost are projected to continue falling. Efficiency should continue to rise year by year as it has in the past. More efficient solar panels also lower the balance of systems cost since it is cheaper to install fewer panels. Of course not all research reaches commericialization, but some research efforts do. Solar is gong to be very cheap in the future.

[solarix]

I'd be a fan of nucler as well if they could just figure out (and factor in) the disposal and decommissioning costs - and don't forget the costs of Fukushima contaminating the Pacific ocean. Too bad they went with bad-failure-mode water cooled reactors back when, and too bad they didn't finish developing Thorium Salt reactors (but you can't make weapons grade Plutonium from those). If you factor all the costs of oil (huge army/navy to protect the supply chain), coal (300 - 500 Billion/yr in health costs), Nat gas (just the potential climate change costs of burning CO2), the simple costs of clean, renewable solar power would look pretty good. We haven't solved the intermittentcy problem of remewable power (yet) and still need better affordable batteries but they are coming....

[rollug]

Yeah, nuclear energy, but nuclear energy now is at the top-end almost. Or you have tech to utilise the radioactive waste.
Of course there is no shortage of fuel, there is planty of it. Fuel from shale in the U.S, are the one of reason why it's so cheap.
Below 40$/barrel...