Energy Experts
- All users
- Gordon Traill
- Mike Mackmurdie
- Linn Raffety
- Tim Pullen
- Good Energy team
- John Martin
- Matthew Rhodes
- John Barker-Brown
- Rick Beament
- Barry Nutley
- Chris Rudge
- Gabriel Wondrausch
- Paul Hutchens
- Graham Eastwick
Other Contributors
Cathy Debenham Gilly JonesArchive
Posting rulesRecent Comments
- Hi I'd recommend that you measure the wind before you install, rat…
comment by Cathy Debenham
- Hmm - interesting. Some of the energy companies seem able to pay, and other…
comment by Cathy Debenham
- Hi As sashton says, you won't use all the electricity you generate in th…
comment by Cathy Debenham
Tag Cloud
YouGen Blog
Efficiency or cost per watt - which is most important?
Posted by Graham Eastwick on 2 March 2009 at 1:56 pm
The development of thin film photovoltaics (PV) is progressing fast. It's still not as efficient as crystalline silicone solar panels, but I have read of projects using thin film technologies from single roofs up to large “solar farms” with capacities in the region of 40 MW.
Crystalline solar panels can reach efficiencies of up to 20 per cent in production these days (which means it converts 15 per cent of solar radiation into electrical energy). Thin film is currently achieving efficiencies of between 6 and 12 per cent. Is this important or is it simply the cost per watt that matters?
If you have plenty of roof space or land then I would think that the cost per watt is the key factor when deciding how large a solar array to install. Thinking further, thin film technologies are said to perform better under overcast diffuse light so actually it is the cost per watt-hour that is the key factor.
In the UK we have quite a lot of diffuse light on cloudy days, so perhaps thin film PV is going to be a good technology for the UK market.
I would be interested in your views on this.
About the author: Graham Eastwick is a director of Encraft, and manages renewable energy installations for home owners, community organisations and small businesses across the UK.
Click here to ask an Energy Expert a question, and sign up to RSS feeds, to make sure you don't miss the answer.
Comments
4 comments - read them below or add one
The USA has developed black silicon and is reported to be x50 more efficient than existing monocrystaline formats. It also converts IR light into electricity. The Yanks are initially going to use it for better X-ray equipment and no doubt DOD uses. The mass market of PV is currently being ignored.
dinesh uberoiComment left on: 27 March 2009 at 7:05 pm
Hi Graham. I would like to know the area required per kw of this sheet and cost per square foot. What would be the life span of the Thin film and the effects of weather on thin film. Could you also suggest the supplier?
Graham Eastwick from EncraftComment left on: 12 March 2009 at 12:12 pm
Thin film PV technology has the potential to reduce the installed cost of a PV system when measured per kWp by 25 to 40%. Thin film is just as robust as conventional panels, the solar material is used to make modules, flexible panels or often applied to roofing tiles of integrated into windows.
Cathy DebenhamComment left on: 10 March 2009 at 12:36 pm
Hi Graham. The inference here is that the cost per watt - and the cost per watt-hour - will be less with film. Is this the case, and if so, how significant is the saving? Also thin film sounds much easier to damage than solid panels. Is this the case, or does it have the same sort of life expectancy?
Leave a comment
You must log in to make a comment. If you haven't already registered, please sign up as a company or an individual, then come back and have your say.
Quick Find
Advanced Find
Promote your business
Make it easy for customers to find you (and recommend your work). It’s free!
Add your company
fuelexplorerComment left on: 18 May 2010 at 11:27 pm