Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

aecarol1 t1_iua37ps wrote

Reply to comment by dubiousadvocate in Low-cost 'transparent' solar cells reach new efficiency record, electricity-generating windows incoming? by VeterinarianProper42

Absolutely! "Proofs of Concept" are valuable and this should be explored.

There is a plausible way forward. I think this is worth pursuing and experimenting with, but we should not be overselling this or its potential based on very, very, very early experiments with none of the obvious downsides being talked about in these press releases.

They advertise the costs of the panel to be lower, but they still need the same controllers, inverters, and wiring as regular solar panels and those cost the same. The required electronics typically cost 40% of what the panels cost. The price of panels has gone down, but per-watt generated, you will need to spend about 40% on inverters etc.

In small business level installations, the cost of the panels is typically 25% of the total cost. Even if they drop significantly in price, the other 75% isn't going down. The total price is lower, but not nearly as much as naively looking only at panel prices would imply.

For example, if the price of solar panels dropped 50% overnight, the total cost for an installation would drop by about 12.5%. Nice savings, but not the 50% we might have hoped for.

Bottom line, I like exploring this, there may be real benefits that are worth looking for. That said, I would not be counting eggs or presuming anything will come of it.

"They laughed at the Wright brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the clown."

1

dubiousadvocate t1_iuaadt4 wrote

>"They laughed at the Wright brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the clown."

Yeah. That was kind of, no actually was, Bozo's business model. And they made millions. That's a strange take.

That said I appreciate the knowledge you brought to this thread even as it is a peculiar mix of optimism and pessimism.

2

aecarol1 t1_iuabsze wrote

My comment was simply to show that one technology being derided and then becoming a spectacular success (aviation), isn't applicable to another unrelated technology being derided. The critics being wrong on one, doesn't mean they are wrong on an another.

I am hopeful for this, but I think this technology has more in common with battery advancements than aviation. On so many technology subjects, we see press releases masquerading as news talking about incredible breakthroughs which reporters extrapolate to societal changing implications. Sometimes they are right (cell phones), mostly they are wrong (Segway)

I enjoyed debating the merits with you also! I hope this pans out, we certainly need as much power as we can obtain and the sun is a great source.

1