The race to build a
cheaper solar cell continues to produce results, as researchers at Ohio State have developed a nanotech solar cell with a unique pink color that they say will one day be able to produce as much power as traditional silicon cells for a quarter of the cost. The dye-sensitive solar cells, or DSSCs, get their pink color from a mixture of
ruthenium and either titanium or zinc oxide particles that absorb sunlight, while nanowires link the particles to provide power transfer. So far the team have gotten the cells to produce half as much power as traditional cells, but the next step is to start using nanowire "trees" to improve efficiency to equal or surpass those levels. No word on when we'll see this tech hit the market, but surely the prospect of a hot pink solar Cadillac isn't too far off.
[Photo is of an unrelated DSSC concept from New Zealand]
posted Jul 30th 2007 10:50PM
sorry but for it to be pink..there must have been some other agenda. lol
Yeah... I bet these solar cells are communist.
@ L. Cyphre
I'd rather say: pink is the lesbian color :))
Or Barbie color (is she lesbian too?)
Best...Title...Ever!
i almost though this was some sort of Hello Kitty joke. althought i guess they could sell a Hello Kitty solar power system for your home
Mary Kay has just placed a 10,000 unit order to place on their HQ!!
They are awaiting a car mockup as well.
Tex
http://www.GamerTex.com
They tried to make it scarlet (half of our school colors - scarlet and grey) but it turns out pink works better.
I don't know how they can make it cheap with Ruthenium. These were first developed with organic dyes from fruits. They should focus on ways to just use those.
http://genchem.chem.wisc.edu/lab/PTL/PTL/Elements/Ru/Ru.html
Holy crap! That's my gen chem professor!
And solar energy will continue to be non-competitive.
Cheap Ruthenium? That seems unlikely. As a percentage of the Earth's weight it's more common than silver and gold, but not what I'd call common. Any kind of mass production would drive prices beyond economical, I'm guessing. Until we can use cheap, widely available raw materials (trees use iron, for instance), this isn't going to be a mass-production solution. That's why conventional solar arrays keep getting cheaper - Si is abundant (second only to oxygen), and it's "only" a matter of costly manufacturing which keeps costs up. A manufacturing breakthrough in Si would probably wipe out any chemical advantage Ru has.
The lessons learned here might of course help us reach that point, however, so woot!
I keep reading about all these wonderful break throughs in solar panels, but I still can't buy a home system for less than 15K or so. Even if that system provided me with 100% of my power instead of like 15%, it would take about 15 years to pay for itself.
And does anyone know the true price of power made from fossil fuel? Including the carbon footprint, the pollution and the National Security aspects? Solar might be competitive if you factor that in.
Jim
Sounds very interesting...