Clear Solar Cells Could Help Windows Generate Power 87
ckwu writes "The vast real estate of windows in office buildings and skyscrapers could be a fruitful field for harvesting solar energy—if lightweight solar cells could be made with a high enough conversion efficiency and appealing aesthetics. Now researchers at Oxford University report semitransparent solar cells that might do the trick. The team made solar cells using a perovskite, a class of mineral-like materials that have properties similar to inorganic semiconductors and show sunlight-to-electricity conversion efficiencies of more than 15%. The team deposited a thin film of perovskite onto glass so that the material formed tiny crystalline islands. The islands absorb photons and convert them to electrons, while light striking the empty areas passes through. The result was a semitransparent solar cell with a grayish tint."
Why only limit to windows ? (Score:2)
If the material Perovskite is as good as they say it is, why limit the application on only the windows ?
We can apply the same thing to walls, to roof, even to pavements, so long as the sunlight can shine on them they get to generate electricity.
Heck, we can apply it on the car windows and car body surfaces as well, and and store the power inside the battery - or use it to run, aka that solar car in the Logan Run's tv series (it was aired in the 1970's, far too old for the young uns to enjoy)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not about places to put them. (Score:2, Insightful)
The challenges for solar cell adoption are:
Cost-effective manufacturing methods
The market price of silicon
Efficiency of conversion
Storing the energy for when it's required (or moving it to where it is helpful)
and Durability
When those problems are REALLY solved, we won't need to have dark windows to generate our energy needs. And we wo
Re:It's not about places to put them. (Score:4, Insightful)
When those problems are REALLY solved, we won't need to have dark windows to generate our energy needs
I think the point of this was that windows are already darkened in office buildings. The solar cells are just a different darkening process that has a nice side-effect of actually generating energy.
Re:It's not about places to put them. (Score:4, Interesting)
What's the issue/s with durability? Mine are warranted for 80% of claimed output up to 20 years (BPSolar), the rooftop mounts are cyclone-rated, and the panels themselves are rated for hail up to (can't remember right now) size.
I've had people ask me about this great offer they've had from some local start-up that offers them cheap chinese panels with a five-year warranty, and I tell them to say "no" until they are offered well-known brands with better warranties. At least those people were smart enough to ask around for advice and opinions - I suppose others who don't ask for advice and opinions might get stuck with poor durability.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
These are thin film solar technology that has less than a 3 year lifespan. they lose nearly 30% of their power output withing 8 months. It is the same junk as the solar panels sold at Harbor Freight.
Re: (Score:2)
Very simple. Thin film on glass = junk.
Actual silicon solar cells = good.
Mono crystalline = very good.
Citation? try www.google.com and my experience at wasting a LOT of money on the garbage sold at Harbor Freight, Sears, Home Depot, etc... if it's a "brown" color and a sheet of glass they are complete garbage.
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't really intended for the home-owner. You're right there--I probably have more space on my roof than the square footage of my windows.
This is for the tall office building in a city. Those tend to have more square-footage in windows than the space available on the roof.
That said, I'd be curious about other buildings blocking the sun in a crowded area.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's not about places to put them. (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, windows need not be "darkened" to provide solar power. Most of the energy in sunlight is not in the visible spectrum.
Re: (Score:1)
Glass is $0.25 a square foot. Solar Cells that have any real efficiency and longevity cost $2.25 a square foot. The bog point is there is barely 10% offset on cost, and these same windows will generate less than 20% of what a normal panel can generate so their economy is even less. Add in losses by being vertical and not tilted to the sun and they will generate 5% of the electricity than a standard cell on the roof will.
So yes, he is missing a big point, these things are worthless as a technology unless
Re: (Score:3)
Except there is no correlation between the cost of this new type of cell and traditional cells, since there is no silicon in these ones and the manufacturing process is completely different.
Re:It's not about places to put them. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
This.
Look up the term "curtainwall" and you'll understand just how true the parent post is. There are entire engineering and construction companies that specialize in nothing but curtainwalls.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In a lot of places the windows are tinted anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's not about places to put them. (Score:5, Insightful)
The challenges for solar cell adoption are:
Cost-effective manufacturing methods
The market price of silicon
Efficiency of conversion
Storing the energy for when it's required (or moving it to where it is helpful)
and Durability
The price of silicon isn't the biggest problem now. Solar cells are already at parity with coal in India [thinkprogress.org], and keep getting cheaper every year.
Efficiency is generally sufficient. A house's whole roof can generally power it.
Durability also isn't generally an issue. Solar cells usually last for upwards of 20 years.
The primary challenges now are:
Installation costs
Electrical connection costs (i.e. an inverter)
and Storage (or grid hookup costs)
Re: (Score:2)
Those problems are all solved too (home battery packs have been available for some time). The only barrier left is the up-front cost.
Missed One (Score:2)
Power companies lobbying for more obstacles and increased costs to be placed in front of consumers daring to consider panels.
Re: (Score:2)
Efficiency is generally sufficient. A house's whole roof can generally power it.
I use my spare bedroom to host an Amazon AWS edge location, you insensitive clod! I need a lot more than a roof full of solar!
Re: (Score:2)
Efficiency is generally sufficient. A house's whole roof can generally power it.
Unless the roof is covered with snow, like it is for several months of the year. Unless you live in the tropics.
Re: (Score:1)
Plenty rooftop installs around here. Also plenty snow.
You don't see covered panels until you have well over 2' on the ground.
And even then it's generally only old-style panels on shallow angle roofs.
So if you have panels getting covered several months of the year... why are you doing a PV install in northern Alaska?
Re: (Score:2)
I live in the Seattle area. No they are not generally capable of powering a home. Only if you pick and choose where you will evaluate the criteria, are they.
Durability is an issue when you live in the midwest where hail, ice and heavy snow can damage just about anything on your roof. You have to insure the solar panel, which then inc
Re: (Score:2)
The key difference between putting solar panels on a roof and fitting these windows is the electricity producing windows are fitted in place of ordinary glass windows.
The cost of the units is offset by not having to buy ordinary window glass. That should make a difference in payback costs and break even point.
Re: (Score:2)
Being forced to have tinted windows is not preferred. You can bet that if these get put on some skyscraper, the boss's windows will be exempt from having these installed.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is comparing a home owner to a corporation.
Sure it's not as cost effective, and doesn't really address the main hurdles with solar... but it looks great on a PR report and it's certainly not coming out of the CEO's pockets.
Paying to distribute the surplus electricity (Score:4, Interesting)
These people are actually freeloaders but of course he can't say what they really are because of political correctness that forces him to use softer words like "freeriders".
I don't want sewage electricity being forced down my throat after it's been on some other guy's filthy roof already! I'm an American; I have a right to choose clean electricity!
IN THE BEGINNING God created heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was floating on the surface of the waters. God said "let there be light" and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness with a thin film of perovskite on glass so that the material formed tiny crystalline islands. The islands absorbed photons and converted them unto electrons, whilst light striking the empty areas passed through. And God saw that it was good. Then God said "let the rooftops sprout with panels: panels bearing light from the heavens"; the ceilings brought forth electricity, freeriders yielding current with voltage in it, unto the grid. And God saw that it was good. Then to be fair he charged the freeriders $100 per month, which Arizona reduced to $5, for those who drilled the formless void of the earth for the Spirit of God, and have to distribute the unwanted surplus electricity. And God saw that it was good.
But .. (Score:4, Funny)
Will they be available as a service pack for XP ?
Re:But .. (Score:5, Funny)
Could... May... Might... (Score:1)
It seems that no headline or story is written anymore without these weasel words that render the subject matter impotent.
Semi transparent cells could, but don't/won't.
Semi transparent cells might, or might not and probably won't.
Semi transparent cells may, but doesn't.
How about we get some tech that actually does shit. Why can't the next headline read; not so spectacular evolutionary tech does get the job done and improves performance ~5%. It will cost more and then later cost less.
Seems like a dumb idea (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, unless you can make these absorb energy only in wavelengths we actually don't want in the house, it seems like all we'd be doing is generating electricity, which we'd then burn trying to substitute the light we filtered out. If these capture either IR, or visible light (and they deffinately capture visible light), then we're just going to end up turning on more light bulbs, and heaters to compensate for them.
Re: Seems like a dumb idea (Score:1)
Not only that but putting solar cells on the sides of buildings is stupid to begin with. Half of the building is always going to be in the shade just by the nature of being a building but when do you ever see buildings on their own? Only the outlying, south facing (in the us and Canada) building would be getting sun all day. Also the angle at which the sun bits the panels is so great that you will be getting only a few watts per square meter of available energy before electrical losses. Solar is only good i
Re: (Score:1)
1) If you transmit all the sunlight in the wanted wavelengths into the house, you'd burn electricity trying to counter the sun heat with air conditioning. (You do keep the house well insulated, right? right??)
2) Excess electricity can be stored in batteries and used at night or when cloudy.
Aesthetics? (Score:2)
When has aesthetics ever played a role in how the glass and steel monstrosities were erected? If the owner thought they could make some extra money, they'll be tacked on, no matter how ugly.
Hmmm.. When did I get so cynical?
Re: (Score:2)
...because the renters like aesthetics.
It'd probably be cheaper to not put in windows (and not heat/cool a building with windows), but people like them.
Any bit helps... (Score:2)
I'm all for solar windows on buildings. It doesn't bring in that much energy per unit area, but on a large, multi-story building, the energy obtained can be substantial.
This is useful for both on-grid use (to help lower power bills), as well as off-grid use (power to be stored in batteries and used with PSW inverters for very clean power in the structure.)
Stuff like this isn't revolutionary, but with energy use, any step helps.
Already Here. (Score:2)
They already have these in Japan, made ironically by an American (good old USofA) company.
Re: (Score:1)
Have any links about that? Preferably in English?
How do they do that? (Score:1)
The islands absorb photons and convert them to electrons
Really?
Re: (Score:1)
Re:How do they do that? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
essay (Score:1)
Clear Solar Cells Could Help Windows Generate Power
Clear Windows Could Help Solar Cells Generate Power
Windows Could Help Solar Cells Generate Clear Power
Clear Power Could Help Windows Generate Solar Cells
If I had grey windows... (Score:2)
If I had grey windows, I'd get less heat from open blinds in the Winter. I'd have to burn more gas.
That said, tinted windows on office building are already the norm so it could work in that setting. It all comes down to cost. Also, what kind of innovative code compliance will you need for wiring from every window?
Re: (Score:2)
Also, what kind of innovative code compliance will you need for wiring from every window?
It won't be that bad with grid-tie microinverters for every pair of windows or so. The complexity is comparable to adding lighting.
Re: (Score:2)
Scraping the bottom of the barrel beyond the edge of reality there. Without anything resembling a product yet there is no answer so you can fill the void with FUD. Why are you doing so? For something so pointless you must have a stake for meaningless FUD.
Re: (Score:1)
Dude, switch to a different strain or just toke once next time. The medical stuff is not like the ditch weed you smoked in high school.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nerd fight! Nerd fight! Oh wait, I'm a participant. Would a disinterested 3rd party please mock us by shouting "Nerd fight! Nerd fight!"?
Sorry but I think this is just another example of how the Internet is a flawed communication medium. I can't imagine that it would be like this at a cocktail party.
I mean, try to imagine me with a beer in my hand saying, "Won't there be code compliance issues, since you're trying to route power around window frames?" and you immediately throwing down your martini an
Obvious damning of new technology (Score:2)
I'm sick of such luddites that attack new technologies with such FUD when there is obviously no answer yet to the question raised. It's not even at the point where the standards that would be applied can be named let alone having something or a domestic electrician to wire up.
5V? 9V? 12V? 110V? H
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think looking ahead to a future where this will require additional electrical code is "FUD". I'm sorry you don't see it that way. Let's say they did have a deliverable, and failed to consider installation issues until that day. Now *that* would be an "end run around reality". Anybody bringing product to market should definitely be considering how it will fit in the regulatory regime.
And while we're on the subject of products that haven't hit the market yet; that's a much more obvious criticism h
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the sort of thing I mean - it's in the lab, years away from a prototype, obviously NOT "bringing product to market" any year soon and you are pushing this line.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry I wasted so much of your time and mine. I should have simply responded to your first post with this [badskeptic.com].
Re: (Score:1)
I think you need to check your definition of pseudo-science.
And RTFS: "...vast real estate of windows in office buildings and skyscrapers...efficiencies of more than 15%"
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Pseudo Science... (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking of pesky laws of physics, o hater of all things right and good...
According to Wikipedia, only about 44% of the sun's electromagnetic radiation that reaches the ground is in the visible light range. [wikipedia.org]. Photovoltaics are typically responsive to limited wavelength ranges. It would make perfect sense to tune semi-transparent photovoltaics to absorb radiation that falls outside the visible spectrum, while transmitting most of the visible light.
You get all the benefits of Low-E glass, plus electricity.
Re:Pseudo Science... (Score:4, Insightful)
We are beginning to design stuff into cars which continuously draws power, much like the numerous things in our homes that never turn completely off.
Solar cells built into car windshields can be used to mitigate the effects of a car not having its engine running. An owner of a solar-cell windshield equipped car will be able to return to his car, parked at an airport after it has sat unused for possibly several weeks, and have the battery fully charged upon his return. I have traveled and it has always been a concern to me whether the car will start after I have ignored it for a week.
Just a few hundred milliamperes going into the battery would have mitigated this concern.
I do agree with the posters who have already pointed out that using this for office building windows is a lot of wasted expensive effort for a negligible ( and likely negative sans tax credits ) return on investment, considering the cost of line power. A car in a parking lot usually has no line power available.
Transparent solar cells (Score:2)
From the makers of submarine screen doors
Headline is misleading (Score:2)
HOAs (Score:2)
These would do well in sunny climates (Score:1)
Like Dubai.
That said, the main barriers are the cost to make PVs, and the storage of the energy itself.
Sunny climates could use the PV windows to generate electricity for cooling buildings, which is up to 40 percent of energy usage in a lot of the world, and even for vehicles to extend their running range, depending on the characteristics of the PV material.
Blue screen of death (Score:1)
And in case of crashing windows, you can see the blue screen of death.
Bert
New/Different Chemistry? (Score:2)
Enron (later BP) Solarex pursued what were called Building Integrated PV panels back in the 90's, but abandoned the project (later sold to US Solar I believe).
Solarex was using germane/silane-doped amorphous silicon deposition at the time. TFA doesn't go much into the actual engineering here.
Main concerns, as always in PV, were efficiency and initial cost.
What is new here?
Perovskite (Score:1)