[RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar and beyond

Sat Nov 1 13:50:58 PDT 2008

Hi Marco,

I'm moving this over to RE-Markets before I get my Send button punched.

I agree and am a crystalline guy for now. But if just 50% of the announced thin film factories come on line and only half of the survivors match First Solar's cost/price/profit, then other thin film wannabees a going to jump in.

First Solar and SolarCity's recent deal is interesting. See http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-solar30-2008oct30,0,3945811.story I have not had much success finding enough space on home roofs for low-power density PV.

Paul Basore and James Gee gave the definitive crystalline PV paper in 1994 (in your neighborhood!) and it still holds true. See http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/10106636-scc2Rs/webviewable/10106636.pdf I think Paul is at CSG Solar (crystalline) and James is at Advent Solar (crystalline).

Aloha,
Joel
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Marco Mangelsdorf 
  To: 'RE-wrenches' 
  Cc: 'Paula Mints' 
  Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 11:21 AM
  Subject: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar and beyond

  Joel,

  I've been either a participant or observer of the PV field/industry as long as most greybeards in the field.  And ever since my entry in the RE biz in the 1970s, the promise from the touters of thin films has been: 1) their product was going to revolutionize the industry, 2) their product was going to dramatically lower the $/watt cost of PV and 3) their product was going to replace that old fashioned and 1950s-vintage crystalline silicon as the dominant semiconductor.in a few years, always in a few years.  And you know what?  I'm still waiting for those oft-repeated claims babbled ad nauseum to become reality.  Yes, First Solar is making great strides in establishing CdTe as a viable segment of the market.  And yes, UniSolar has carved a nice, and very small niche, in the market as well.  But if you look at the still near dominance of crystalline (as in 85-90 percent) of the worldwide PV market, I still conclude that when it comes to price, efficiency, dollars/watt installed, reliability, longevity and unmatched operational time in the real world, this talk of thin films being poised to take over is the same bunch of hooey that it was in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and now.

  My two aloha cents worth..

  marco,

  ProVision, Hawai'i

  Hi Jay,

  My experience was the exact opposite with Unisolar triple-junction structural standing seam systems in 1996 and megawatts of Unisolar from 2003 to 2007. My Unisolar tests and installations exceeded PVWATTS kWh estimates by approx 5% (PVWATTS uses crystalline PV temperature coefficient). PVWATTS is a reliable estimator for crystalline PV systems when 0.65 dc-to-ac derate factor for battery based systems and 0.75 to 0.82 for batteryless systems was used. See http://www.uni-solar.com/uploadedFiles/0.4.2_white_paper_3.pdf

  a-Si degradation is no mystery. See http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/28333.pdf NREL on-going tests since 1997 validates Unisolar's 20-year 80% warranty claim. It is interesting that the time of year Unisolar is deployed affects its light induced degradation. See "Recovery of Light Induced Degradation in Amorphous Silicon Solar Cells and Modules."

  I think that Unisolar modules are suitable:

  when high power density is not required

  if flexibility and/or conformability are wanted

  if partial shading is an issue

  if high cell temperature is an issue

  if building integration is wanted

  if no glass is wanted

  if its unique appearance is wanted.

  The "aluminum-frame-glass-module" monopoly has been broken. Unisolar's persistence, First Solar's CdTe success, and the re-appearance of CIGS (remember Arco/Siemens 1998 ST modules?) along with "see through" and other flexible PV modules is changing PV. The lowest price per watt (initial cost) is gradually giving way to lowest price per kilowatt-hour (lifecycle cost). It's still a neck-n-neck which PV technology will win, but there is no doubt that PV is winning almost everyone's heart and mind.

  Best regards,

  Joel Davidson

  "Not all change is for the better, but nothing gets better without change." So vote for change!

    ----- Original Message ----- 

    From: jay peltz 

    To: RE-wrenches 

    Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:23 PM

    Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar

    Hi Joel, 

    1.   unisolar 64's and sharp single cystal

    2. SMA inverters

    3. Arcata California

    4. exact, I mean side by side with no shading, same azimuth ( south) same tilt ( can't remember)

    5.  As to the unisolar producing more, I must stress that I have never seen the Unisolar produce more than SC, never.

    jay

    peltz power

    On Oct 31, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Joel Davidson wrote:

    Hello Jay,

    Sounds like something is wrong other than Unisolar vs. crystalline. All things being equal, the Unisolar should produce more kWh per kW than crystalline. Questions:

    1. What modules and how many of each?

    2. What inverter or inverters?

    3. Geographic location?

    4. Array azimuth and tilt?

    Best regards,

    Joel Davidson

    ----- Original Message ----
    From: jay peltz <jay at asis.com>
    To: RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
    Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:27:19 AM
    Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar

    Hi Geoff, 

    In regards to the performance between Unisolar and crystalline, there is a side by side ( same watts, batteryless intertie with metering) installation up here on the North coast of California, and the the Unisolar is the constant under-performer.  This includes cloudy, sunny, warm, cold weather.

    I have seen nothing in the field to support the Unisolar claims about better performance in low light etc.  That said, they do work better in very hot conditions, if thats what you have.

    jay

    peltz power

    On Oct 31, 2008, at 8:08 AM, Geoff Greenfield wrote:

    As a follow up to my uni-solar post (and thanks to all who provided feedback),  I have a second request:

    Any references to recent side-by side "shoot-outs" between Unisolar and conventional crystaline PV?  Scientific studies?  Your own wrench thoughts?

    I am more and more often encountering confused customers that are considering unisolar systems at zero-tilt (we are at 40 degrees N), with plenty of partial shading, after getting a pitch about all sorts of advantages of Uni-Solar.  I think that this product has it's role and I occasionally sell it... But I am frustrated when I truly believe I can deliver a better net energy production with a tilted crystalline solution (avoiding the shaded areas).  

    For a brighter energy future,

    Geoff Greenfield
    Founder and CEO
    Third Sun Solar & Wind Power Ltd.
    340 West State Street, Unit 25
    Athens, OH 45701

    740.597.3111     Fax 740.597.1548
    www.Third-Sun.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  List sponsored by Home Power magazine

  List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org

  Options & settings:
  http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

  List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

  List rules & etiquette:
  www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

  Check out participant bios:
  www.members.re-wrenches.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20081101/2fc1959c/attachment-0003.html>