Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Email This Story
Share This Story
Reader Comments (23)
Image Gallery (1)
Add to Bookmarks
Printer Friendly Version
Solar photovolaics (PV) have undergone a remarkable evolution, really a transformation, since the beginning of the industry in the 1960s. Initially solar was so expensive -- well over $100 per kilowatt hour -- that only super-high value or remote applications, such as satellite and spacecraft missions, could be justified.
A tremendously compelling case, and one often cited by less often studied, however, is that of the Sunshine solar energy program in Japan. Over the course of almost two decades, starting in the late 1980s, Japan developed and then implemented a remarkably coordinated, well-designed solar development and dissemination effort.
Following the OPEC embargoes of the 1970s, a wave of investment took place in the industry that, while brief, helped to bring a number of largely silicon-based technologies to niche markets. Since then scientific and materials engineering progress in the solar field has been steady, with an evolution away from silicon as the only material, to a truly exciting and promising range of plastic, thin film, nano-based, and organic cells.
While the potential for solar has long been touted as a clean, no-carbon (in the use phase) and very low carbon (including manufacturing) technology, just how to implement solar has been an issue. Initial technological breakthroughs and manufacturing techniques had energy analysts planning large-scale "solar fields" to replace fossil fuel power plants.
One such test-bed, the aptly named Photovoltaics for Utility-Scale Applications (PVUSA) built in the 1980s in South Davis, California, took the utility-based plan literally with a then-huge 1 MW field of photovoltaic solar panels. The large-scale, slightly remote PV plan gave way during the late 1990s and the last few years to a far more distributed model of rooftop (both commercial and residential) that has seen sales growth of over 20 percent per year for the last decade and a half, with global production growing by close to 50 percent each of the last two years. Total production in 2006 was over 2,000 MW, with installed, unsubsidized costs, now coming close to 20 cents/kWh in the best applications.
This has been remarkable progress, but from such a small base, skeptics note that it will take decades for solar to become a major contributor, and during that time we may be well on the way to irreparably altering the climate system.
What can be done to dramatically accelerate—or at the very least evaluate the potential for—a true evolution/revolution in solar energy?
First, it is important to note that several very different models have emerged that have all put large amounts of solar into commercial service. Germany instituted a very generous feed-in tariff that guaranteed early installers a fixed income for the long-term (typically 20 year) solar contracts.
California, the third-largest market for solar on Earth, has over 30,000 home and small-business systems installed, and in 2006 put in place a 10-year, $3.3 billion program termed "Million Solar Roofs" that should add a whopping 4,000-10,000 MW of solar over the coming decade.
Kenya, not a place that comes readily to mind as a PV leader is, in fact, just that. With roughly 30,000 small (truly small, 20-100 watts, not kilowatts, per household) systems sold per year, has the world's highest household solar ownership rate.
These programs are all promising, and so far successful. A tremendously compelling case, and one often cited by less often studied, however, is that of the Sunshine solar energy program in Japan. Over the course of almost two decades, starting in the late 1980s, Japan developed and then implemented a remarkably coordinated, well-designed solar development and dissemination effort.
As can be seen in Figure 1, a steady build-up in solar energy research and development (green and yellow) was then partnered with a more rapidly expanding deployment and dissemination effort that focused on consumer and utility education, trial and test home, business, and industry locations (blue), products and services. This sort of staying power and coordination of both the so-called "technology push" (R&D) and "demand pull" (commercialization) efforts is truly a rare thing of beauty in the world of technology policy.
The Sunshine program is not just pretty on paper, it really worked. During the program annual PV installations grew to over 300 MW of solar/year, and the rate of cost decreases grew to almost 10 percent year.
This is compared to the best rate seen in California to date, at about half of that: a 5 percent rate of cost declines per year. This level of cost improvement is very significant, and took place at the same time that Japanese research laboratories made a succession of scientific and engineering advances.
What is needed next, of course, is replication and scale-up. Programs like the Sunshine effort, or more broadly the efforts of the 'big three' of Japan, Germany, and California, need to be developed, and put in place for the long haul in a far larger range of countries, states, and municipalities.
Second, the lessons of these efforts, in terms of technological leadership, job creation, and climate protection—need to be well-documented and widely known.
Third, and in many ways the least easy to do, the real benefits of solar need to be monetized. Local solar installations reduce the need for investments in new power plants, and—critically—lessen the likely peak power demand on crisis days.
Solar also reduced demand on the transmission and distribution system, and puts emission-free power near people, thus directly benefiting urban air quality and health.
Daniel M. Kammen is the Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy at the University of California, Berkeley. He co-directs the Berkeley Institute of the Environment and is founding director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory. He has appointments in the Energy and Resources Group and the Goldman School of Public Policy.
This article was reprinted with permission from Greenbiz.com.
The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.
With such conclusive evidence of the benefits of coordinated R&D and commercialization, it is a shame that these advances cannot be implemented now within the U.S. What are we waiting for - another world war brought on by manipulation of the oil market? Oh wait, that's already in the beginning stages now isnt it?
Thanks for the article.
Dreaming and fantasizing are the first step towards innovation. People all over the world and especially in America are dreaming of a green world where there will be only solar power energizing the needs of the entire country.
Experts feel that in five years, solar power will be cheap enough to compete with conventional electricity, even in UK, Africa, Australia and India. If that is the case more and more people will use solar energy in their homes. In a decade, the cost may have fallen so dramatically that solar cells could undercut oil, gas and coal. Technology is leaping ahead towards eco friendly, pollution free and a green future with the advent of solar energy homes.
Companies producing solar products feel that the day is not so far off when all the cities in America and Europe generate their heating, lighting and air-conditioning needs from solar energy for their homes and on buildings with enough left over to feed a surplus back into the grid.
A piece of dark polymer foil, as thin a sheet of paper can cause this wonder. It is 200 times lighter than the normal glass-based solar materials, which require expensive substrates and roof support. Indeed, it is so light it can be stuck to the sides of buildings.
This can be mass-produced in cheap rolls like packaging and can be in any color to go with the structure and design of the solar energy home. It will be the icing on the cake when the capital cost of solar power falls below the rate of oil or gas. That will be the day when every individual would wish to switch to solar energy for their home use.
Scientists all over the world say that the future lies with solar energy. Using solar energy for home use like heating, cooking, driving car and for all other uses like charging your mobile phone, street lights and heating the swimming pool and powering your computer will become a way of life. Just as the saying goes that sun never stops shining in California, a solar energy home will never lack the power required to run the house.
China is another country which is fast using this solar technology for its future growth. Japan already is moving in the direction of saving its excess power and the government there is helping device methods to save money on fuel. The future of solar energy homes is spreading rapidly in the east. The Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy is formulating a program to introduce solar energy to more than a million homes in the next few years.
India has long days and plenty of sunshine, especially in the Thar Desert region of Rajastan. With abundant solar energy available, this zone is attracting attention from the Indian government for its research purposes. Solar energy is being used in India for heating water for both industrial and domestic purposes.
Human beings may not be trustworthy but the sun is always kind and generous to mankind in general. Let’s hope the future of solar energy homes all over the world is not very far away.
Chad Hartman is a solar power supporter and a staff writer for Go-Solar.org. To learn more about solar energy and how you can benefit from it, please visit our site at: http://Go-Solar.org Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Chad_Hartman |
Concentrating solar power is the other big solar technology - and much cheaper than PV.
Further information about concentrating solar power (CSP) and highly-efficient HVDC
transmission of electricity may be found at:
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/index.htm
and
http://www.trecers.net/index.html
and
http://www.trec.net.au/
They Renewable Energy people have done a poor job of defining the size of the need & how to compete with the cost of GRID Power. They have encouraged the government to imply that it can directly compete with the source of energy that created it.
It is time for the Renewable Energy people to 1st define the size of the need 2nd acknowledge the requirements of distributing and storing energy. From the Big picture design to create sellable spinoff benefits that people have shown they are willing to pay a premium for. This premium will be required to subsidize the cost of the infrastructure.
| Solar PV is now ready for Utility Scale Introduction with over 2GW planned from Thin Film plants, some of this is already rolling out as of to-day. With promised costs of under US$0.5/watt at large Gw volumes we are bound to see more Mw sized Solar Palnts feeding Utilities with their mandated green power. Within 5 years Solar PV will surely compete neck to neck with wind |
Fellow Berkeley alum here.
We manufacture our solar LED lighting solutions in Japan and the technology currently available is amazing. However, we just need to better educate the American public and push community leaders to invest in the future.
Great Article
Looks like tax breaks are greatly improving for non business solar.
http://www.seia.org/solarnews.php?id=144
"Provides no extension of the existing 30 percent Investment Tax Credit for homeowners under Section 25 of the tax code, but eliminates the existing $2,000 maximum dollar limitation"
A great estimator is at http://www.findsolar.com/index.php?page=rightforme , chose Type of Building as : Business - it gives you better options to enter your info; electric rate, installed cost/watt.
I did my own spreadsheet ( confirming Phi). For Florida with the federal tax credit I am starting to look at large systems. 8.6 kW PV, dual inverters, ignoring installation, $5500. :) 2 year payback !
But will need a second mortgage to afford initial cost :(
Sorting out the confusion.
There are information tha's not in the article then I have to assume they are: productively operational hours/day and the life span.
If AA as the ourput of that PV and that one has 6 hrs of g....o...o...d sunlight per day (???) then 1 year its runs 365 *6 = 2190 hours.
Then AA * 2190 = total wh/year or AA * 2.190kwh/year.
I should reasonaley assume its life span is 30 years ? ? ?
Therefore the total of power it generates is AA * 2.19 * 30 (kwh)= 65.7*AA (kwh).
Then Cost/(65.7*AA)=$0.20
To calculate cost per watt one Then
If AA+1 then the cost per watt is 65.7 * 0.2= 13.14
- I do not know the life span of the mentioned PV you can plug in other number (30) if you know it.
Now we do other calution with assuming that the upo front cost is 13.14 per watt. (remember each Watt output will produce 2.19kwh/year above) and and in my case my electricity cost $0.12/kwh. then I will save me the yearly amount of 0.12 * 2.19 =$0.2628 for each $13.14 I invest.
Or
Each dollar of investment I will save 0.2628/13.14 = $0.02 /year
Or
50 years to recover my initial investment.
Hope this helps
Phi (Neo-aerodynamic.com)
LOOK,...........Do we actually have a choice. It's coming down to wind, solar and geothermal. I don't want to see more people dying because of energy problems in this country. We need our corn,.....to eat not produce more CO2.
Half of our energy is gone, half is left.
We need petroleum for every single thing in society; forget about cars and transportation. Lets get the PHEV's coming from Ford and Chevy and create a nice museum for the muscle cars that are technologically obsolete anyway and start to say "AAHHHHH" with the Tesla and innovations in battery density for our autos.
And please, "go get me a Chevrolet,..." Yaah when you can produce a PHEV that gets 50+ miles per gallon like our counterparts, I'll be glad to buy Amercan.
I have put togeter a short cut that you calculate renewable investment return as percentage and pay-back base on cost/output number of operational hours. It aslo help you to calulate your daily saving. (the web page has two calculation schemes please scroll down to the second one).
It's not 100% accurate because the manufacture's Output does not represent the real number at your particular situation on its entire operational period. -
it is: http://neo-aerodynamic.com/Calculator.html
Hope it helps.
Phi (neo-aerodynamic.com)
www.mdgazette.com/vault/cgi-bin/gazette/view/2007G/09/08-21.HTM
A little perspective.
The solar PV industry would need a capacity of 83TW/yr to replace 50% of the 14 Quad/yr U.S. electrical demand in 25 years. Worldwide PV installed capacity is about 8 GW. The solar manufacturing industry is at least 10,000 times too small just for the U.S. market. When experts talk about bringing the price down through manufacturing economies of scale, they are being politely correct. We need to match our vision with the task. There's been a call for government assistance. It's needed. Not to subsidize products, but to bring the producers to the scale required to meet the future demand.
Nay sayers point to the cheap price of coal and it's ample capacity to provide power to the U.S.. What they are missing is coal liquids will be needed to replace petroleum while we transition to renewables in the transportation sector. The demand will drive up prices, potentially quadrupling the rate of coal production. Current coal reserves at the current rate provide a 100 yr safety net for power production. If coal replaces imports for the transportation sector it's viability is reduced to around 25 to 30 years. Coal is not a long term option. What about the Alberta tar sands? Don't listen to John Stossel. Go to Alberta. Get the facts. Go see what they're doing to Alberta, then decide.
Renewable energy is not an option, it is an imperative. The PV industry must scale-up soon. It may not be able to do so without assistance in financing production equipment and facilities. Also it needs people, and more support in education, research, and development.
Most of all, all of us need to think and act much, much bigger.
Previous Article
