Producing Solar Below 70 Cents a Watt

By Stephen Lacey, Editor
September 7, 2010   |   13 Comments
The race to produce solar PV for less than a dollar per watt is over. The new cost race is now based on cents, not dollars.

Do you like this podcast?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
Click to play podcast
13 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 13
September 8, 2010
I would be happy to buy a 10% efficient system, installed, for under $1500/kW.

That would amortize out to more than I currently spend on electricity, but I'm willing to take a hit for significantly reducing my carbon footprint.

That said, regardless of the hype of $0.76/W, you can't possibly find a deal that would satisfy my cost demands. Those thin-film cells are vulnerable, and must be protected... with glass. So you save money on the cell, then you spend fortunes on the protection!

But, I guess it gets a few soundbites and some hype for a while.


This is not a competitive technology.
Comment
2 of 13
September 8, 2010
Actually this news seems like good for only solar cell manufacturer. The PV thin flim market is not as recongnized as sillicon PV market. It's impressive but nobody know the future of PV thechnology
Comment
3 of 13
September 8, 2010
In response to the gentleman who thinks this is not a competitive technology; the thought that modules which use amorphous silicon have a different glazing than silicon modules is just plain wrong. Sure, First Solar modules use unframed glass layers to protect the CdTe semiconductor material, but that does not mean that other manufacturers will do the same. Sharp makes an a-Si module, that is framed, and has the same type of glazing that any crystalline module might use. It is not any more or less fragile than any other photovoltaic module.
Comment
4 of 13
September 8, 2010
In all due respect to glenn-doty-175949, I would like to make a few corrections to your comment.

Firstly, the 10% is the efficiency of the modules, and not the entire system. Efficiency in a solar/PV system is usually between 70-85% depending on numerous factors.

Secondly, the $0.76/W production cost is for the entire module including glass protection, and is not the price for only the cell. I would personally like to know the consumer's cost for both First Solar and Oerlikon's modules. Even so, I know that First Solar's modules are mostly only available to the commercial/industrial/utility markets due to massive demand and limited production capabilty, although there are a few large scale residential intergators who offer First Solar modules as an option.

Thirdly, $1500/kW installed is extremely unrealistic in today's market. Given all the equipment/design considerations together with installation, you will be hard pressed to find any installer who will provide a turnkey residential system for under $5000/kW assuming professionalism and competence.

As I'm sure you know, the amortization of a system is dependant on several factors. The most important of these factors are the price of your electricity and incentives. If your electricity prices are low, and you have no state/utility incentives, then I completely agree with you - the system will probably amortize to more than you pay for electricity. If you live in a place such as California, then a turnkey PV system costing $5000/kW would prove to be an extremely sound investment.

With all that being said, my intentions are not to offend. I believe that when reliable PV modules with these low prices become available to the average consumer, we will see a much more rapid increase in the adoption of solar. The industry seems to be heading in the right direction!
Comment
5 of 13
September 8, 2010
Snbdavey & Ben-kahane.

I'm not trying to be offensive here. I just GET offended by fluff articles that blatantly distort market potential of alternatives.

First, the cost/W listed absolutely doesn't include anything other than the base cost of the cell itself.

They only currently sell to large installations in bulk, and their price for these contracts are $185 for their 75-W panels.

That's ~$2.50/W for just the cell cost at bulk pricing. That's more than polysilicon panels cost for bulk purchase.

It's just not there yet, and puff pieces like this won't help it get there. If we pretend the problems with the industry don't exist, then the public will not accept the technology with the problems. In this case - advertise to Joe Public that Solar PV costs $0.75/W, and he simply won't consider an install cost of $6/W... regardless of the fact that this is clearly what solar PV costs today.
Comment
6 of 13
September 8, 2010
I have worked with solar energy since 98, we, SolarHealth, make solarpasteurised milk for hiv-protecting mothers milk (extremely small scale) to pasteurising cows milk. I was and am really offended by even the thought of using cadmium - one of the worst of the heavy metals - for 'green' energy. Why?. Polycrystaline. mono, amorphous, a-Si and probably a few others. Wow at the 0.76$/W but not the mile ahead of other technologies it would have to be to not be absolutely mad!
Jonas Nohr, assistant manager.
Comment
7 of 13
September 8, 2010
Just realize it may take 1,000 square feet of surface to install 4 KW of thin film, all that extra racking, wire and combiners. I'd still rather spend more for standard 50+ year panels and have more power on my roof. Not to mention how great my trackers do. Not so easy with thin film. Concentrate my power potential, don't dilute it.
www.earthbilly.com
Comment
8 of 13
September 9, 2010
In response to glenn-doty-175949 second comment... no offense taken.

You said: "First, the cost/W listed absolutely doesn't include anything other than the base cost of the cell itself."

Article states: "...industry leader First Solar was the first company to produce cadmium-telluride thin-film modules for below a dollar a watt. Today, the company is producing panels at 76 cents a watt – a benchmark by which all other solar manufacturers are compared." ...and... "...equipment manufacturer Oerlikon says that its new fab line is able to pump out 10 percent-efficient amorphous-silicon (a-Si) thin-film modules for under 70 cents a watt."

All of these quotations state that the price of $0.70 - $0.76/W is for the entire module/panel. This was stated 3 times in the above article quotations. Also, I know for a fact that First Solar's prices are for the completed module, and not just the cell. However, these are production costs and not consumer costs. Now, you may be correct in saying that the bulk consumer cost is $2.50/W (although this seems really high), but again, that would be for the entire module.

To be clear, I'm not saying that problems in the industry don't exist... because they sure do! Every industry has its issues! Also, Joe Public definitely wont have access to these low prices for a while, thus, it is our job to educate Joe public about these industry facts, and to find an alternate solution to his problems... such as higher efficiency modules, as earthbilly suggests.
No image available
Comment
9 of 13
Anonymous
September 14, 2010
The bulk cost of a CdTe panel is not $2.50Wp, that is far in excess of the real price, this would be the installed cost including framing, cabling labour, profit etc in a large industrial application. Their performance in the real world versus their real cost ensures that CdTe manufacturers can sell all the product they can produce. I know, I supply this type of equipment, these modules are used in these situations only not because of any shortage, it is because unlike other solar modules they come with a full recycling scheme, the manufacturer takes them back to a third party recycling company and 100% is recycled. It is difficult to keep track of privately owned smaller solar systems and ensuring that they are recycled, so large commercial systems where a contractual obligation can be ensured is the policy. The cost to recycle is put into escrow so that regardless of wether the manufacturer is in existence in 25 years time the money to provide the recycling service is available in trust.
Even though the amount of Cadmium is very small, 600 modules have about the same as one AA nicad 1.2V battery, these manufacturers use the full recycling feature to eliminate any environmental concerns of the product in the marketplace and turn a potential negative into a great positive. This is great, all other manufacturers should be regulated to ensure they do something similar and be responsible cradle to grave.

The other thing to think about these modules utilise proprietary technology developed by the companies themselves, you cant ring up some manufacturing specialist and order machines to make them, unlike say amorphous panels, hence it is a closed shop amongst 2 or 3 manufacturers. Anyone seriously considering large scale flat plate technology for solar, this technology would most likely be pick number one.
Comment
10 of 13
September 14, 2010
Cadmium and zinc are in the same group in the Periodic Table of elements. They have similar chemical properties, and occur together in nature. The amount of cadmium in a CdTe module is about 1/2400 of the cadmium in a galvanized (zinc-coated) steel roof sheet.

Cadmium is particularly dangerous when inhaled as a vapor, and over 60% of the public's exposure to cadmium occurs during the melting/roasting of zinc from its ores, when the more volatile cadmium is evaporated by the ton.

Just below cadmium in the Periodic Table is mercury. Avoiding CdTe modules, and relying on coal-fired electricity contributes to worldwide mercury contamination as mercury is vaporized and distributed over large areas in the large-scale burning of coal. This is recognized by scientists as the primary cause of toxic mercury compounds in tuna . . today.

Workers in the zinc and cadmium process industries (including the manufacture of cadmium telluride PV modules) must observe strict rules to avoid poisoning. But the minute amount of cadmium in these modules do not pose a significant public health risk. As pointed out in the previous comment, this amount is very small compared to that of a single nickel-cadmium penlight cell.
Comment
11 of 13
September 14, 2010
I gotta say I believe that glen-doty is correct.

Back when the 1$/Watt threshold was the brass ring, I conducted an analysis of of a "typical soup-to-nuts" installation on a commercial building.

I injected one twist. Using First Solar's then very hard to find efficiency claims, I set the price of the solar material to $0/Watt -- that's right free cells. But because of all of the associated BOS and installation, the net cost of a typical install still managed to ring the bell at $6/Watt *before incentives*.

Why you're asking??? Well the lower efficiency of the thin films requires more area, and the extra area costs more to install. More rooftop, more frames, more conduit, more wire, more junction boxes, more sensors, more weight, more labor!!!

It's not the cell cost, it's the whole package. And frankly, I'm having a hard time swallowing that "recycling trust-fund" [censored] notion. {sorry}

So let's cut through the fluff.

Perhaps there are folks reading this that would be interested in <4$/Watt *installed* CSP systems??? You can even say it sounds like "steam & mirrors" (cough) -- because that's *exactly* how it works!

The Light is Green!
Comment
12 of 13
September 14, 2010
Actually the metric is LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy) which is how much energy is produced in a year versus the cost. Concentrator cells are now 39% efficient in production and
http://www.emcore.com/assets/photovoltaics/CTJ_Terrestrial_Receiver_datasheet.pdf
and 41.6% efficient in the lab.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PVeff(rev100414).png
The higher efficiency and less materials in the solar cells give concentrators a big advantage. Keep in mind that the concentrators also use tracking which increases the efficiency by another 30% to 40%. Companies like Amonix (www.amonix.com) and Sol Focus (www.solfocus.com) will probably come out ahead. I also like the Rainbow Concentrator technology (www.sol-solution.net).
Comment
13 of 13
September 14, 2010
The race is over.

OBM Global MAFG Reactors make 240kW DC three phase 440 600 amp installed for under $0.50 cents per watt.

Over a 20 year period the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is only 1 penny per kilowatt hour created over a 20 year period.

Solar prices today over a 20 year period Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is $0.40 cents per kilowatt hour produced for a simular invested energy dollar.

its simple solar is far away from not needing goverment incentives for installationn and if it was not for the incentives Solar would be dead in the water.

The OBM Global MAFG Reator needs no goverment incentives nor do you need any investments to buy it.

Electric Energy Store is offering it at no cost to consumers who qualify providing them with a 50% reduction in power cost from day one of installation.

No investment needed, no goverment incentives needed just a straight 50% of past bill turned into a flat fee per month.

What solar manufactures will need to do it become progressive otherwise the new alternative power providers like the MAFG Reactor are going to make solar over priced and obsolete.

see more at www.electric-energy-store.com
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

Stephen Lacey

View Stephen Lacey's Profile
About: I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, wh... more »

Advertise With Us

Solar FlexRack HelioSage Schneider Electric ESI Inc. of Tennessee Midwest Renewable Energy Association Alpha Technologies Parker Hannifin - Precision Cooling Systems
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