Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

U.S. Begins Solar Photovoltaic Module Testing

July 21, 2006   |   10 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
In addition to the electrical performance of the photovoltaic roofing samples, measurements are made of the coincident ambient temperature, wind speed, and solar radiation incident upon the samples.
10 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 10
July 21, 2006
It's a good thing that the Feds are moving to
standardize test procedures to compare technologies under varying conditions. If the tests are valid (that is, more valid than the auto crash tests were for many years) they serve to focus industry efforts to improve efficiencies. If the tests are invalid, they will lead companies astray in their product changes. That is why all tests absolutely HAVE to be well thought out ,
or they may very well do more harm than good,
which is just what the auto crash tests did for all those years.
Comment
2 of 10
July 26, 2006
the results will never be made public because the lack of consumer information will alow them to continue to steal from us
Comment
3 of 10
July 26, 2006
The people really need such testing, but the results should be public; and the results should include cost-effectiveness. The CA PUC did an analysis of a P-V schoolsite installation and came up with a $.25 per kilowatt-hour cost over 25 years - based on a 10-year loan. Unfortunately our district financed the project over 20 years, so our cost will be even higher. The installed cost was $8.33 per watt - even with rebates - vice DOE's goal of $1 per watt. With electricity costing $.14 per peak kilowatt-hour, it doesn't look like we made a very good deal. Hopefully the government's new 50%-cell-efficiency project will be successful, and
P-V will finally become cost-effective.
Comment
4 of 10
July 26, 2006
I am greatly impressed with this testing as I have had interest in pursuing installation of this type of a photovoltaic system on a commercial setting for several months. With nothing but the mfgr's. stated system efficiency and the high ROI, the cost of these systems are prohibitive and the gamble too great. I will be watching for future results from this testing on which to base my decision. Thank you.
Comment
5 of 10
July 26, 2006
Another concern with this project, being funded and administered by the "government", is which PV manufacturers will be given the resulting data. If this taxpayer funded and publicly owned wealth of long-term data is given to only a select few manufacturers and not to all qualified competitors, one can be sure that the technology will be exploited to the benefit of those few to their own shareholders interests rather than the best public interest.
The pharmaceutical industry is a perfect example of this business strategy.
Jim Duncan

http://fairtax.org
Comment
6 of 10
July 26, 2006
Would simply ask....WHO SELECTED THE NINE ? Were they totally random....drawn from a "drum" full off business cards ?

What century shall we test Professors/Doctors/Physicists- Laing(s)solar devicewww.pyronsolar.com ?
Respectfully submitted, prm jr.


I will be surprised if any device breaks 20 % efficiency....how 'bout QUOTE 37.3 USDE UNQUOTE ?
Comment
7 of 10
July 27, 2006
Just a reminder that PV's are only part of the installation. The inverter technology interfacing the PV's to the grid can make a performance difference as well. As more countries world wide implement feed in tarifs overall long term performance is what counts.
Comment
8 of 10
July 28, 2006
In addition, it is important to know that "performance" can be a deceptive term. While thin-film modules have a lower efficiency than silicon modules, they can also convert diffuse sunlight. As a result, they produce power for more hours each day (they start earlier and finish later) then silicon modules. This is why experienced system integrators in Europe have observer *higher* yearly output from thin-film systems despite "lower" performance characteristics. Higher output per year, combined with significantly lower prices than silicon-modules mark a path toward cost-effectiveness.
Comment
9 of 10
July 28, 2006
I have to disagree: performance is not what counts, but rather the price/performance ratio. If the performance of PV modules doubles but their prices triple, PV will still not be cost-effective. This is why fans of PV should pay close attention to thin-film modules being produced by companies like First Solar and Nano Solar. Their performance (in terms of efficiency of conversion from light to electricity) is lower than that of the silicon modules that make up over 90% of todays yearly installed capacity (though their efficiency is forecast to surpass that of silicon modules within a few years). But their cost of production is dramatically cheaper, allowing much more aggressive pricing.
Comment
10 of 10
July 29, 2006
Its about time the government showed an interest in the smart technology. Maybe we can see a drop in prices of PV technology so the average Joe can afford it.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Concepts NREC groSolar AllEarth Renewables Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America RES Offshore Delta Rigging & Tools Stoel Rives LLP
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters