Solar cell breakthrough: 40% efficiency achieved

If that silly Hummer O2 concept vehicle we just saw didn't sate your appetite for environmental friendliness, try this on for size: researchers at Boeing-Spectrolab have just succeeded in building a multi-junction solar cell that achieves an incredible 40.7% efficiency, or -- to the best of our knowledge -- about twice that of the reigning champ in this space. To put this Department of Energy-backed breakthrough in perspective, it was less than two months ago that Silicon Valley-based SunPower announced a 22% efficient cell, and even that model was claimed to produce 50% more power over a given space than previous iterations. In case you're unfamiliar with multi-junction cells -- no shame in that game -- they can best be described as being composed of several layers, with each slice capturing only a portion of the solar spectrum; this method of optical concentration is what has allowed cells to surpass the 12% to 18% efficiency barrier faced by most traditional modules. In conclusion, while this is certainly an encouraging development, we remain somewhat skeptical about its potential for real-world implementation: once Big Oil gets wind of this new tech, it will likely "disappear" just as quickly as that guy who invented a car that runs on water, man.

[Via Slashdot]

[Pete @ Dec 6th 2006 3:42PM]

If we could get these on our homes for reasonable prices with payoff ranges under 5 years we could start selling electricity to the local utilities and make some cashola.

[par @ Dec 6th 2006 3:59PM]

Countries with lots of sun should use this as much as possible. House roofs should be made out of this. What are people/governments waiting for? The savings would be enormous in the long term.

[Matt @ Dec 6th 2006 4:04PM]

Well, to start I would imagine that they are waiting for an actual product. Just because something worked in a laboratory doesn't mean you can all of the sudden stroll on down to your local Walmart and pick one up.

While a 40% efficiency rate is a tremendous breakthrough, there are probably still a lot of problems to solve. For instance, how much does it cost to manufacture one? Doubling the energy output doesn't help a hole lot if it costs 3 times as much to make one.

[uetani @ Dec 6th 2006 4:59PM]

Not necessarily true. What if the resources consumed to create the material are high and the lifetime of the material is short? Unless the total life cycle of the product results in a lower consumption of resources over its competitors the product is fun from a technology standpoint but has no place in general use.

[Craig @ Dec 6th 2006 4:07PM]

Any idea how much these things will cost?
Oh, by the way, the highest efficiency until now was 30% (it's in the linked article ^^)

[Alcaron @ Dec 6th 2006 4:13PM]

"In conclusion, while this is certainly an encouraging development, we remain somewhat skeptical about its potential for real-world implementation: once Big Oil gets wind of this new tech, it will likely "disappear" just as quickly as that guy who invented a car that runs on water, man."

Translation:

"In conclusion...we would like to make some stuff up."

[Crazylink @ Dec 6th 2006 5:09PM]

He didn't make that up. It's a common phrase that Steven from that 70's show says when he's high.

[mike @ Jun 17th 2007 2:27AM]

its an old twilight zone show about a man who invented a car that runs on water.. look it up

[James @ Dec 6th 2006 4:28PM]

I think NASA would just use it for the satellites and space probes. It'll be a while before this technology trickles down to the consumer level.

[Samuel McConnell @ Dec 6th 2006 4:39PM]

If these really are 40% efficient, then there may not BE utilities to sell the electricity back to for long.

[oxfdblue @ Dec 6th 2006 4:50PM]

This is great. Want to see it in widespread use...let's get Al Gore to run for President.

PS- It may not be anywhere close to 40% efficient, but the technology is out there to turn most glass surfaces into solar electric generators. A small company called XSunX has developed a product called PowerGlass, a solar energy film that would be placed in between layers of glass. Imagine all the glass towers in this world as one giant solar energy collector?

[Z @ Dec 6th 2006 4:51PM]

I want these for home. Anything to make it as green as possible.

[noni @ Dec 6th 2006 4:52PM]

Boeing is in the solar power game now? Since when has there been sun in Seattle?

[Lita @ Dec 6th 2006 5:18PM]

Spectrolab is in Southern California. Related to Boeing's sattelite works (used to be part of Hughes, I think). Plenty of sun in Cali. Boeing's not even based in Seattle anymore, dude. They're all about Chicago now.

[Paul @ Dec 6th 2006 4:55PM]

Um, you may need utility companies for the cloudy days.

[rkguy @ Dec 6th 2006 10:03PM]

Hey, its good to see someone thinking about lifecycle analyses.

Earlier solar panels produced a net loss (0.1%) in energy when looking at the fuel used to mine the oars, the cost of fabrication, transportation, lifetime, and efficiency.

Hopefully we'll have a real winner on our hands this time around, always keeping in mind the process from development to decommissioning

[James Sonne @ Dec 6th 2006 5:16PM]

With this level of solar efficiency, we could supply the entire world's energy needs by covering a region the size of L.A.
Why do we still burn things? I'm so confused.

[Gil @ Dec 6th 2006 5:25PM]

Because it's cheaper.


Hell we could blanket parts of Sahara. I calculated the costs to cover the entire desert in a previous comment but they were incredible. Small regions however are possible.

As a plus we'll also have a gigantic mirror that we can use to attack things in space. The Death Earth... we'll have to make sure we don't leave any cooling vents open :)

[disciple83 @ Dec 6th 2006 5:26PM]

the fun thing about that solar energy storage is that the energy can pretty much go anywhere once it has been converted, including batteries. Cloudy days aren't as big a problem as you would think. I am sure as the technology develops to make the collection process more efficient, the technology to increase storage capacity and efficiency will also develop. One day, we will actually be able to run a house or office building on pure solar, even during the cloudy days. (Maybe a nuclear backup unit will be more convenient then as well.)

[Gil @ Dec 6th 2006 5:33PM]

I just realised that this invention brings Solar to roughly the same efficiency level as Coal burning!!!

From wikipedia:
When coal is used for electricity generation, it is usually pulverized and then burned in a furnace with a boiler. The furnace heat converts boiler water to steam, which is then used to spin turbines which turn generators and create electricity. The thermodynamic efficiency of this process has been improved over time. "Standard" steam turbines have topped out with about 35–40% thermodynamic efficiency for the entire process, but the emergence of supercritical turbines running at extremely high temperatures and pressures has led to efficiencies of 46%, with further increases in temperature and pressure offering potential for even higher efficiencies

[Matt @ Dec 6th 2006 9:29PM]

you trust wiki? i waste time screwing with their articles

[Craig @ Dec 8th 2006 11:52AM]

HAHAHA that has nothing to do with pv cell efficiency... with pvs, the efficiency is the percentage of photons that knock electrons loose (thus generating electricity. Not thermodynamic efficiency... You just can't compare...

[Simon @ Jul 16th 2007 7:43PM]

There are certain other advantages to not burning coal!

[Larry @ Dec 6th 2006 5:42PM]

And in another two months you will see similar results with RSL, also working on full spectrum plus CIGS technology. Big oil isn't big enough to stop what is happening in photovoltaics. Soon, the downstramers will be talking about "Big PV". The big story is what this technology will do for the developing world, but they are a secondary target.
Hang on. This is going to be a fun ride.

[Vince D @ Dec 6th 2006 5:51PM]

Easy guys.

Simple economics will drive the dynamics of this. If the cells can be produced economically, AND widespread production is feasible, AND the efficiency works out in practice, AND they are adopted on a large scale, the very first thing that will happen: the price of electricity generated by fossil and nuclear will drop. Dunno what this will do to the payback period.

Bottom line - let the PV cells be produced. If they make economic sense, people will buy them, the price of electricity will drop, along with greenhouse gases. If they don't make economic sense, they will fail, or be supplaned by a different technology. Under NO circumstances should government get involved.

[Ian Jardine @ Dec 6th 2006 5:49PM]

One Question:

What time to market?

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Dec 6th 2006 6:34PM]

Indeed.

[disciple83 @ Dec 6th 2006 6:04PM]

In theory, with America's free market, the government isn't involved. But chances are, with the promise of freedom from war-causing demands for oil, not to mention the decrease in spending alone for the wars and the oil, I have a feeling the government will not want to put a hindrance on something like this. With the technology being developed in the US, it would also give us an edge over foreign nations in the tech market, allowing for a change of pace outside of computer operating systems.

[Vince D @ Dec 6th 2006 6:09PM]

Government involvement would be the worst thing possible, because it tends to fix technology at an early stage and preserve it forever, killing innovation. Let technology and the free market work, and soon we might see 60% efficiency, let government get involved and we will be stuck at 40% for all eternity.

And the bit about it decreasing the propensity of government to start wars - that's a joke, right?

[John @ Dec 6th 2006 6:22PM]

Just for all of you that didn't do your research, these are concentrator cells, which are vastly different than your run of the mill Si solar cell (the 22% efficient ones) and operate at 200 to 400 suns. Also Spectrolab just broke their old record of 39%, which just occured last year. So, I laugh at all your excitement and the revolution this new cell is going to bring.

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Dec 6th 2006 6:30PM]

Get some buckets of green paint then.

[darshanmathew @ Dec 6th 2006 6:36PM]

solar power?
it produces DC electricity.
its not easy to convert all appliances from AC240V or AC110V to work with DC.

also solarpanels can be personal home or maybe just the neighbourhood. cos DC doesnt travel far. without gr8 losses. Lossless transmission: its the reason why AC was invented.

congrats to the guys who developed the efficient solarCells. just hold on to it tight. cos some venture capitalist will come along promising a bright future for the entire world. and once he takes over you'll find out he is owned by an oil company and he can sit on the idea and stifle development of the project as long as they want. viva OPECartel.

[Freetolio @ Dec 7th 2006 7:28PM]

AC transmission is not a lossless process by any stretch of the imagination. That's why you can stand under high voltage lines at night and light up a fluorescent bulb by positioning it vertically.

[Chris @ Dec 7th 2006 1:52PM]

Most of those devices convert that AC back to DC before actual use.

[macgyver1 @ Dec 6th 2006 6:37PM]

I sure someone KEEPS THIS AFLOAT. Big Ol' will sure drive down prices to keep these things out of our hands. I hate greed...

[Sean @ Dec 6th 2006 6:48PM]

Triple junction, high efficiency cells are typically very expensive and pretty much only cost efficient when used in satellites (Boeing has aerospace and military divisions).

- Sean Wachob

[nikster @ Dec 6th 2006 7:03PM]

About Big Oil, You should know that BP renamed itself "Beyond Petroleum" which pretty much says it all. Oil is on a time-line. While there's lots of oil in the ground, it becomes economically unfeasible once it costs a barrel of oil to get a barrel of oil out of the ground, and it will become too expensive for most practical applications long before that time.

40% efficiency is awesome!! Solar is already very efficient for heating water, basically all you need is some black piping. Thermal pumps also have come a long way, and there are now many zero energy houses built in Europe - without a lot of sun. The same thing would be WAY easier in California or any of the more sunny states in the U.S.

In addition, using solar power to cool down buildings should be a natural, since the solar cell already absorbs a percentage of the sun's energy.. if anything solar + thermal pump cooling in hot countries should be a lot easier than using the same thing for heating in cold countries...

[Vortex @ Dec 6th 2006 7:39PM]

> I want these for home. Anything to make it as green as possible.

I believe that the goal of a solar cell is to be as black as possible. :P

[Kevin K @ Dec 6th 2006 8:51PM]

This is great news!

Any word on availablity? Demand is here, with double the power of previous toting panels, this oens a sure hit!

Visa?

[Luke @ Dec 6th 2006 9:18PM]

Almost had another good article without a BS slant at the end. Here, I'll help you guys out and ship you a load of tin-foil.

[Steve @ Dec 6th 2006 9:23PM]

It's kind of funny... because if (like people are suggesting) we were to have everyone put them on their roof, then the demand for electricity would go down... and selling your "extra" wouldn't be worth it.

[wickedjimmy @ Dec 6th 2006 9:34PM]

By "Big Oil", do you mean The White House? Let's not forget when our Commander and Chief feel off the oil-free Segway. "Ooops!" *Sign*

[Chris Chance @ Dec 6th 2006 9:44PM]

i love how they say "blanketing parts of the sahara with this would be too expensive"

lets see when oil hits 100$ a barrel will it be still to expensive? why does the econemy have to be so damn reactive instead of proactive????

Its not about MONEY, learn the facts, if it was the gas industry and its billions of dollars revenue every month would be enough cash to blanket just about anywhere... especially if you take into account the EXTREME tax breaks and subsidies big oil gets.

[Chris Chance @ Dec 6th 2006 10:05PM]

lol its big oil.. not the white house... the issue is the puppet masters behind the whitehouse... anyone that thinks its a joke really needs to understand how "lobbyists" work

[fredouil @ Dec 7th 2006 1:58AM]

"primary reason innovation is at a crawl in electric generation is this government-protected monopoly"

no, the biggest reason is that all innovative techno like Nuclear, solar whatever needs huge starting investment at the beginning but are quite cheap on long term. The problem is the cost is mainly related to the cost of debt and private companies cannot compete efficiently on these kind of project and always choose the cheapest with the fastest ROI : the dirty Coal.

but in France the government was the main stakeholder (low cost of debt) and they created there a huge nuclear development (87% of the electricity) with a fantastic infrastructure, same for the gas, at the lowest coast possible.

remember capitalism doesn't guaranty the cheapest price but is all about transparency.

[Murc @ Dec 7th 2006 12:09AM]

impressive...but it all comes down to economics...whats the damn price?

and for the guy/idiot to say "Al Gore for President"...I really hope your joking...that guy is the biggest tool around. His movie is full of lies...but he knows that the people who watch it will believe anything he says anyway...so theres no point for factual accuracy.

And for the guy talking about how we can be 100% solar, becasue we can use batteries to store the eltricity.....not happening. batery tech is lagging, you cant store enough to keep you satisfied. If you building a "green" home, its best to use 2 sepperate methods...I would suggest Solar & wind. Personal turbines are for salw now...for like 10 grand you can power 30-70% of your house...and that with solar and you should be good to go.

[SoreThumb @ Dec 7th 2006 12:31AM]

Someone invented a car that ran on water? Gimme weblinks.

[Chris @ Dec 7th 2006 1:56PM]

----- Joke ---->

SoreThumb's Head

[ScooterJP @ Dec 7th 2006 12:53AM]

Car that runs on water?

You must mean the aquada:
www.gibbstech.co.uk/aquada.php

[fredouil @ Dec 7th 2006 1:58AM]

without government involvement nothing is really possible when it come to energy since it require huge investments and long-term view, private companies lack of both, they can not finance with cheap loans like those that State have access to.

the third world infrastructure in US and UK is good indication about what non-government planning can do ;-).