Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Innovalight's Silicon Ink

By Joe Kwiatkowski, Physicist, Imperial College London
May 14, 2008   |   10 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
10 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 10
May 14, 2008
Sorry... re-read again... yes cell.. had a 5 year old screaming in the background... tends to disrupt ones thoughts....
Comment
2 of 10
May 14, 2008
No it said $1 a watt...
......eventually be sold for US $1 per watt — a figure perhaps ........
But you are right on the rest.....
Comment
3 of 10
May 14, 2008
Note the article said "Cell".
A Panel with a cell price of $1 per watt is still $5 a watt all things being equal. That 10% efficient panel is twice the size of a sunpower panel, costs twice as much to install, takes twice as much glass and aluminum to frame. Has twice as many connections and connectors. Costs twice as much to ship from production to site., and costs four times as much to move for re-roofing, if that is ever needed.

Like Clinton's win in West Virginia - nothing here changes the math very much.
Comment
4 of 10
May 14, 2008
Hi: I would "eat my shoe" if PV cost at retail even hits $3 a watt within the next 5 years or ever..... too many interests want it to remain up there...
.....Bill
Comment
5 of 10
May 16, 2008
I am not an EE or physicist, but I do question how much energy is required to raise the temperature to 1400 degrees C or even 500 to 900 degrees C, to produce these thin-film silicon solar cells?

Is this akin to the amount of energy required to run an electric car, which has to be plugged into the wall socket to recharge, using coal or oil (carbon based) to produce the electrical energy to recharge the battery?

Wheret is the law of deminishing returns in this process?
Comment
6 of 10
May 16, 2008
Until there is demand the price will never come down. I am so tired of all these companies reinventing the same wheel instead of coming up with a better way to get it in use. I can not believe any one would invest in any of these companies until the government says they have to be used.

Here in Florida with our current housing crunch is the perfect time to mandate all new homes built to be energy neutral. They can say that each house will have to produce 1.5KW per 1,000 sq ft of interior space. With our rebate system this would cost less than $20,000 more per house. Then each house sold has to be retrofit with solar panels at the time of close. Eventually all homes in Florida would be solar powered decreasing the need for fossil fuels.

It is going to take the government to get behind any of this before it will ever take off.
Comment
7 of 10
May 16, 2008
As energy costs continue to increase, perhaps it's wise to consider the full production stream costs and complexity of technically "high-end" solutions to solar PV production. Even at "modest" temperatures between 300 C. and 900 C. here, that's still a LOT of heat to apply -- and perhaps for up to 10 hours (??!). That heat must come from someplace -- likely from generated electricity obtained through the grid, which can be precisely controlled. Details are understandably vague here (to protect patent applications, etc.), but I kind of question the use of this much power to create "printed PV" with a purported efficiency of only 10%. I think the 'total' cost of production, considering the full life cycle cost of all components needed in this production stream, will be more than $1 per watt. BP's PV plant in Frederick, Maryland, uses a huge bank of solar cells on the side of their building to create a substantial percentage of the electrical power needed to make their PV wafers. That makes things a little cheaper, supposedly. In addition to these "high-end" solutions, we need to keep searching for more lower-end, less technologically challenging (and expensive) methods to create power from renewable resources. High-output advanced techology wind turbines and the new experiments with run-of-the-river water turbines are good examples.
Comment
8 of 10
May 17, 2008
Heat energy for solar cell manufacturing is no problem at all. Just use solar concentrators - and have zero emissions and zero fuel cost!
Comment
9 of 10
May 28, 2008
Jon,
You just paid 100 million for a silicon wafer facility. You operate 24-7 rain or shine. Now you look at trading 365-24-7 uptime for 35% uptime and 20% uninterrupted (cloud-free) uptime for the price of electricity. Do you really think this is all "just that easy"?

I doubt it...

Ben
Comment
10 of 10
January 16, 2009
In an earlier interview Innovalight stated "well under $0.50/watt" at the cell level. That means the balance of system "inverter etc.", and labor is the bulk of the cost. You can design a system with no inverter; just use DC loads. The mass produced cost of the ink will not be much different than for other similar ink. Once the patents expire, the ink will be very cheap.
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

Applied Energy Technologies (AET) Nextek Power Systems, Inc. Texas Renewable Energy Industries Association AltaTerra Research Unirac, Inc. Natural Power Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America 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 Photovoltaics World Magazine 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