<html><body>Yes Doug... I am waiting for some more in-field time for the enphase, and am trying to pencil out install labor differences of micro VS central... something we are all curious about.<br><br>In this application however, the crstaline alternative would allow me to only locate modules in non-shaded roof areas... The less energy dense laminates are everywhere... right up against hoods, skylights, mechanicals etc. It is my assertion that all the sub-optimal locations, the zero degree azimuth, AND the mis-matched string voltages of the proposed "plan A" all will greatly reduce performance, eliminating the 5% advantage of the unisolar (In this application). With the outrageous cost differential ($6.20) of PVL with velcro, I can even provide an array 5% larger at a lower cost.<br><br>We shall see. The architect and owners have been sold a bill of goods, and with limited understanding have designed a system that offsets any PVL advantage. Oh well.<br><br><br>For a brighter energy future, <br><br>Geoff Greenfield <br>President <br>Third Sun Solar & Wind Power Ltd. <br>340 West State Street, Unit 25 <br>Athens, OH 45701 <br><br>740.597.3111 Fax 740.597.1548 <br>www.Third-Sun.com <br><br>Clean Energy - Expertly Installed <br><br><br><br><br><br><br>----- Doug Pratt <DMPRATT@SBCGLOBAL.NET>wrote: <br>> Geoff, <br>> <br>> If you're going crystalline now, and have shading problems, this might be a <br>> good system to consider the Enphase micro-inverter. No strings! Each module <br>> delivers whatever it can and isn't affected by its neighbors. On the down <br>> side, Enphase so far has only released models for 72-cell modules (24v <br>> nominal) up to 180 watts, and just last week a new model for hi-volt Sanyo <br>> HIP/HIT series up to 220 watts. You'll pay a bit more for inverters, but PV <br>> performance is the best possible. <br>> <br>> Cheers, <br>> Doug Pratt <br>> <br>> -----Original Message----- <br>> From: re-wrenches-bounces@lists.re-wrenches.org <br>> [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces@lists.re-wrenches.org] On Behalf Of Geoff <br>> Greenfield <br>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 8:50 AM <br>> To: RE-wrenches <br>> Cc: RE Marketing for home scale RE industry <br>> Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar and beyond <br>> <br>> thanks everyone! Once more this list is a fantastic resource. <br>> <br>> As a follow up, the original post was related to mismatched strings... I <br>> will be suggesting a design change to achieve consistant string voltages. <br>> <br>> More than any marketing claims, I trust this list's experience. I will be <br>> proposing a crystaline alternative and will size it 5% larger. (I am <br>> motivated to do this as this project has "special" laminates with foil and <br>> Velcro, at 6.22/w! So much forcist advantage! As full as this roof is, <br>> plenty of that expensive pv is in shaded spots... Another reason my <br>> crystaline alt would pwrfirm better. <br>> <br>> Regarding the pv watts modeling and the 5% advantage, did that include the <br>> difference in tilt? I'm thinking that I'll have some additional gains with <br>> 10 degrees vs flat. <br>> <br>> For a brighter energy future, <br>> <br>> Geoff Greenfield <br>> President <br>> Third Sun Solar & Wind Power Ltd. <br>> 340 West State Street, Unit 25 <br>> Athens, OH 45701 <br>> <br>> 740.597.3111 Fax 740.597.1548 <br>> www.Third-Sun.com <br>> <br>> Clean Energy - Expertly Installed <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> ----- Joel Davidson <JOEL.DAVIDSON@SBCGLOBAL.NET>wrote: <br>> > Hi Marco, <br>> > <br>> > I'm moving this over to RE-Markets before I get my Send button punched. <br>> > <br>> > I agree and am a crystalline guy for now. But if just 50% of the announced <br>> thin film factories come on line and only half of the survivors match First <br>> Solar's cost/price/profit, then other thin film wannabees a going to jump <br>> in. <br>> > <br>> > First Solar and SolarCity's recent deal is interesting. See <br>> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-solar30-2008oct30,0,3945811.story I <br>> have not had much success finding enough space on home roofs for low-power <br>> density PV. <br>> > <br>> > Paul Basore and James Gee gave the definitive crystalline PV paper in 1994 <br>> (in your neighborhood!) and it still holds true. See <br>> http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/10106636-scc2Rs/webviewable/1010663 <br>> 6.pdf I think Paul is at CSG Solar (crystalline) and James is at Advent <br>> Solar (crystalline). <br>> > <br>> > Aloha, <br>> > Joel <br>> > ----- Original Message ----- <br>> > From: Marco Mangelsdorf <br>> > To: 'RE-wrenches' <br>> > Cc: 'Paula Mints' <br>> > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 11:21 AM <br>> > Subject: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar and beyond <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Joel, <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I've been either a participant or observer of the PV field/industry as <br>> long as most greybeards in the field. And ever since my entry in the RE biz <br>> in the 1970s, the promise from the touters of thin films has been: 1) their <br>> product was going to revolutionize the industry, 2) their product was going <br>> to dramatically lower the $/watt cost of PV and 3) their product was going <br>> to replace that old fashioned and 1950s-vintage crystalline silicon as the <br>> dominant semiconductor.in a few years, always in a few years. And you know <br>> what? I'm still waiting for those oft-repeated claims babbled ad nauseum to <br>> become reality. Yes, First Solar is making great strides in establishing <br>> CdTe as a viable segment of the market. And yes, UniSolar has carved a <br>> nice, and very small niche, in the market as well. But if you look at the <br>> still near dominance of crystalline (as in 85-90 percent) of the worldwide <br>> PV market, I still conclude that when it comes to price, efficiency, <br>> dollars/watt insta <br>> lled, reliability, longevity and unmatched operational time in the real <br>> world, this talk of thin films being poised to take over is the same bunch <br>> of hooey that it was in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and now. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > My two aloha cents worth.. <br>> > <br>> > marco, <br>> > <br>> > ProVision, Hawai'i <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Hi Jay, <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > My experience was the exact opposite with Unisolar triple-junction <br>> structural standing seam systems in 1996 and megawatts of Unisolar from 2003 <br>> to 2007. My Unisolar tests and installations exceeded PVWATTS kWh estimates <br>> by approx 5% (PVWATTS uses crystalline PV temperature coefficient). PVWATTS <br>> is a reliable estimator for crystalline PV systems when 0.65 dc-to-ac derate <br>> factor for battery based systems and 0.75 to 0.82 for batteryless systems <br>> was used. See http://www.uni-solar.com/uploadedFiles/0.4.2_white_paper_3.pdf <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > a-Si degradation is no mystery. See <br>> http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/28333.pdf NREL on-going tests since 1997 <br>> validates Unisolar's 20-year 80% warranty claim. It is interesting that the <br>> time of year Unisolar is deployed affects its light induced degradation. See <br>> "Recovery of Light Induced Degradation in Amorphous Silicon Solar Cells and <br>> Modules." <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I think that Unisolar modules are suitable: <br>> > <br>> > when high power density is not required <br>> > <br>> > if flexibility and/or conformability are wanted <br>> > <br>> > if partial shading is an issue <br>> > <br>> > if high cell temperature is an issue <br>> > <br>> > if building integration is wanted <br>> > <br>> > if no glass is wanted <br>> > <br>> > if its unique appearance is wanted. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > The "aluminum-frame-glass-module" monopoly has been broken. Unisolar's <br>> persistence, First Solar's CdTe success, and the re-appearance of CIGS <br>> (remember Arco/Siemens 1998 ST modules?) along with "see through" and other <br>> flexible PV modules is changing PV. The lowest price per watt (initial cost) <br>> is gradually giving way to lowest price per kilowatt-hour (lifecycle cost). <br>> It's still a neck-n-neck which PV technology will win, but there is no doubt <br>> that PV is winning almost everyone's heart and mind. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Best regards, <br>> > <br>> > Joel Davidson <br>> > <br>> > "Not all change is for the better, but nothing gets better without <br>> change." So vote for change! <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > ----- Original Message ----- <br>> > <br>> > From: jay peltz <br>> > <br>> > To: RE-wrenches <br>> > <br>> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:23 PM <br>> > <br>> > Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Hi Joel, <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 1. unisolar 64's and sharp single cystal <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 2. SMA inverters <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 3. Arcata California <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 4. exact, I mean side by side with no shading, same azimuth ( south) <br>> same tilt ( can't remember) <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 5. As to the unisolar producing more, I must stress that I have never <br>> seen the Unisolar produce more than SC, never. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > jay <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > peltz power <br>> > <br>> > On Oct 31, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Joel Davidson wrote: <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Hello Jay, <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Sounds like something is wrong other than Unisolar vs. crystalline. <br>> All things being equal, the Unisolar should produce more kWh per kW than <br>> crystalline. Questions: <br>> > <br>> > 1. What modules and how many of each? <br>> > <br>> > 2. What inverter or inverters? <br>> > <br>> > 3. Geographic location? <br>> > <br>> > 4. Array azimuth and tilt? <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Best regards, <br>> > <br>> > Joel Davidson <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > ----- Original Message ---- <br>> > From: jay peltz <JAY@ASIS.COM><br>> > To: RE-wrenches <RE-WRENCHES@LISTS.RE-WRENCHES.ORG><br>> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:27:19 AM <br>> > Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] crystalline VS uni-solar <br>> > <br>> > Hi Geoff, <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > In regards to the performance between Unisolar and crystalline, there <br>> is a side by side ( same watts, batteryless intertie with metering) <br>> installation up here on the North coast of California, and the the Unisolar <br>> is the constant under-performer. This includes cloudy, sunny, warm, cold <br>> weather. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I have seen nothing in the field to support the Unisolar claims about <br>> better performance in low light etc. That said, they do work better in very <br>> hot conditions, if thats what you have. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > jay <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > peltz power <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > On Oct 31, 2008, at 8:08 AM, Geoff Greenfield wrote: <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > As a follow up to my uni-solar post (and thanks to all who provided <br>> feedback), I have a second request: <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Any references to recent side-by side "shoot-outs" between Unisolar <br>> and conventional crystaline PV? Scientific studies? Your own wrench <br>> thoughts? <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I am more and more often encountering confused customers that are <br>> considering unisolar systems at zero-tilt (we are at 40 degrees N), with <br>> plenty of partial shading, after getting a pitch about all sorts of <br>> advantages of Uni-Solar. I think that this product has it's role and I <br>> occasionally sell it... But I am frustrated when I truly believe I can <br>> deliver a better net energy production with a tilted crystalline solution <br>> (avoiding the shaded areas). <br>> > <br>> > For a brighter energy future, <br>> > <br>> > Geoff Greenfield <br>> > Founder and CEO <br>> > Third Sun Solar & Wind Power Ltd. <br>> > 340 West State Street, Unit 25 <br>> > Athens, OH 45701 <br>> > <br>> > 740.597.3111 Fax 740.597.1548 <br>> > www.Third-Sun.com <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ <br>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine <br>> <br>> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org <br>> <br>> Options & settings: <br>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org <br>> <br>> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org <br>> <br>> List rules & etiquette: <br>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm <br>> <br>> Check out participant bios: <br>> www.members.re-wrenches.org <br>></body></html>