Oerlikon Solar works to pull down PV costs in 2014
December 7, 2011 by Nancy Owano 
(PhysOrg.com) -- Switzerland-based Oerlikon Solar, kingpins in thin film silicon solar module equipment, has announced that it has reached a milestone in reducing the cost of production for its thin-film silicon photovoltaic panels. Oerlikon Solar describes its business as one that designs and manufactures equipment and turnkey manufacturing lines for the mass production of environmentally sustainable thin film silicon solar modules. The company said it is to realize a module manufacturing cost of 0.35 euro ($0.47) per watt in 2014.
The significance of this announcement is seen by observers as an industry marker that (1) PV generation might turn out to be cheaply priced in 2014 and (2) that the energy industry is going to see some recalibrations of price points not seen before.
The Oerlikon Solar company said the price advantage being announced, however, is not a given if certain conditions are not met. The manufacturing cost of 0.35 euro per watt will be possible, according to the company, only if production takes place in some regions in China where labor costs are low and where production lines are in full operation.
Oerlikon Solar, which is headquartered in Trubbach, Switzerland, does business in 13 locations worldwide. The company’s key mission has been to achieve cost reductions, and the company forged key partnerships to make that happen.
Oerlikon Solar has teamed up with two major players in photovoltaics, Air Liquide, gas suppliers, and Linde Electronics. Air Liquide is in the business of gases for industry, health and the environment. The company produces air gases (oxygen, nitrogen, argon, rare gases) and other gases including hydrogen. Linde Electronics supplies gases, chemicals and technologies to solar cell manufacturers.
The two partners will support Oerlikon’s lines ("Thinfab") with infrastructure and customer supply-chain requirements. The three are aligned to a strategy to bring costs down. One approving body will be the EU-funded PEPPER project, which focuses on thin film silicon solar research.
PEPPER’s stated goal similarly is to see decreased costs of thin film silicon PV modules within the next three years.
Project supporters emphasize photovoltaics as an emerging power source carrying significant environmental and economic benefits. PV systems are touted as safe, reliable, having a constantly decreasing payback time, and potentially able to create thousands of jobs. At the same time, its weakness at present is easily acknowledged: It continues to be a more expensive approach than grid-supplied electricity produced from conventional sources.
More information: http://www.oerliko … lar/thinfab/
© 2011 PhysOrg.com
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
4 comments
-
Need a rigid insulation material???
20 hours ago
-
magnets or EMF in car bumpers to protect from fender bender
May 26, 2012
-
length of wire in a coil of known dimensions?
May 25, 2012
-
India Engineering Powerhouse
May 25, 2012
-
electromagnet core dereference between hard and soft iron
May 25, 2012
-
Measuring water pressure in an open tank
May 24, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Engineering
More news stories
Browser wars flare in mobile space
The browser wars are heating up again, but this time the fight is for dominance of the mobile Internet.
13 hours ago |
5 / 5 (2) |
3
Probability of contamination from severe nuclear reactor accidents is higher than expected: study
Catastrophic nuclear accidents such as the core meltdowns in Chernobyl and Fukushima are more likely to happen than previously assumed. Based on the operating hours of all civil nuclear reactors and the number ...
Technology / Energy & Green Tech
May 22, 2012 |
3.7 / 5 (23) |
56
|
HyperSolar shows dirty water no barrier to power world
(Phys.org) -- The Santa Barbara, California, company, HyperSolar, is set to transparently share the ups and downs of its research experiences toward the company’s ultimate vision, successfully producing ...
Technology / Energy & Green Tech
May 24, 2012 |
4.8 / 5 (16) |
17
|
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
Technology / Hi Tech & Innovation
May 26, 2012 |
5 / 5 (5) |
13
|
Tesla to launch electric sedan in US on June 22
Tesla Motors said Tuesday it would begin deliveries of "the world's first premium electric sedan" on June 22, slightly ahead of schedule.
Technology / Energy & Green Tech
May 22, 2012 |
4.5 / 5 (12) |
18
'Unzipped' carbon nanotubes could help energize fuel cells, batteries
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes riddled with defects and impurities on the outside could replace some of the expensive platinum catalysts used in fuel cells and metal-air batteries, according to scientists at ...
Change in developmental timing was crucial in the evolutionary shift from dinosaurs to birds: study
At first glance, it's hard to see how a common house sparrow and a Tyrannosaurus Rex might have anything in common. After all, one is a bird that weighs less than an ounce, and the other is a dinosaur that ...
Computer model used to pinpoint prime materials for efficient carbon capture
When power plants begin capturing their carbon emissions to reduce greenhouse gases – and to most in the electric power industry, it's a question of when, not if – it will be an expensive undertaking.
T cells 'hunt' parasites like animal predators seek prey, study shows
By pairing an intimate knowledge of immune-system function with a deep understanding of statistical physics, a cross-disciplinary team at the University of Pennsylvania has arrived at a surprising finding: T cells use a movement ...
Land and sea species differ in climate change response: study
(Phys.org) -- Marine and terrestrial species will likely differ in their responses to climate warming, new research by Simon Fraser University and Australia’s University of Tasmania has found.
Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy
Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match ...
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 1.7 / 5 (6)
So only if Chinese labor wages remain very low will this become reality.
Wages are rising in China so I'll bet this will never become as cheap as they claim.
Go nuclear instead...
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (5)
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
What do you mean? That creating a 1W panel should produce less CO2 than burning 0.35 cents worth of coal? Unlikely.
But that's not the point. The point is that over the lifetime of that 1W panel it will produce so much energy that - if you were to burn the enough coal to get the same amount of energy - you would produce a LOT more pollution.
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (6)
Much like Glenn Beck, that idiot doesn't get that.
$0.47 per WATT is the projected price of the panel,s o if you had a 220 Watt panel, that would only be $103.40.
But electricity currently cost as much as 15 cents per kilowatt-hour.
So I mean, even if you only get 4 hours of peak output, this panel will pay for itself at current energy costs in 26 months, ignoring hours of partial output...
With an expected product life span of probably 25 to 30 years, this means the final cost of electricity throughout the lifespan of the product will only be around 1 cent per kilowatt-hour, which is so much cheaper compared to grid power that it's laughable...Even by the time you count install and maintenance, it's 2 cent per KWH long term...
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (7)
221 gallons of gasoline at current prices is $700.
But wait, generators aren't anywhere near ideal, they are about 30% efficient, which means you'd really need 3.3333 times as much gasoline to make as much electricity for 25 years, so let's up the ante to737 gallons gasoline, which would cost around $2333.
So for a generator to make this much electricity for 25 years costs, at todays's prices:
$2333 for fuel.
$2000 for the generator
But the generator will probably break down several times, requiring maintenance, repairs, or replacement,s o add another $2000...
yeah, them fossil fuel electricity is "sooo" much better than solar...not...
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 3.6 / 5 (10)
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
Okay, that's pretty good. Brevity IS the soul of wit.
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
Where do you propose to place the 200,000 nuclear reactors that you will be forcd to build?
Dec 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Be careful about the rhetoric here. There's a huge push by Chinese firms to kill the US solar industry and dominate this critical market. Recent dumping by Chinese firms in the US has resulted in an investigation which will likely result in tariffs. Furthermore, the cost of production primarily hinges on the bulk cost of glass/silicon. With wages rising in China, the price of labor is likely to mean little, if anything.
The real drivers in solar panel prices going forward will be:
1. The cost of panel production (falling rapidly)
2. The cost of installed capacity (set to fall -- average for utilities is about $3.00 per watt including labor etc and about $6.00 per watt residential)
3. The degree to which governments incentivize this new industry through subsidies, rebates, and other programs.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Very nice.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Sorry meant to give you five stars for the witty post. I myself am considering solar for the long term benifits as well. And the benifits can be pretty good.
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
You don't need 200,000 reactors. How did come up with such a ridiculous number?
Current total world power need is 14,000 GW which makes around 14,000 1GW reactors, plus 10% back-up (availability factor is 90 % for modern reactors). Makes 15,400 reactors...
I suppose we would have plenty of space not having to cover millions of square miles with PV panels...
Oh BTW, how do we get power from the PV panels at night?
Don't tell me it's going to be battery driven...
Dec 08, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Electricity to hydrogen and back
Electricity to hdyropower and back
Solar thermal to molten salt and back
Electricity to pressurized gas and back
...
The possibilities are endless.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
global population of 15 billion people powered strictly by nuclear and consuming energy at U.S. levels of waste.
Feel free to provide your own estimates based on the above criterion, or explain to us why the above criterion are not valid.
"You don't need 200,000 reactors. How did come up with such a ridiculous number?" - Dane
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Some systems capture thermal photons via PV.
But I don't propose using PV at night. Why do you presume I would, or even presume that doing so is necessary?
Are you suffering from a case of terminal stupidity?
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Logically, one would assume that anyone who advocates grid scale photovoltaic power would also have an answer to the question of what happens at night when the sun don't shine, but people are still using electricity. Or frankly, at any time before 9 AM and after 3 PM when the solar output drops considerably.
PV may be getting cheaper, but how many Hoover Dams would you need to build for a grid buffer to actually use it, and how much would it cost per kWh? And how much would it cost in terms of the environment?
Without grid scale buffering, photovoltaics can only produce between 10-20% of the whole lot because of the low capacity factor due to the limited production hours.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Do what works best where you are.
Use as much wind as possible where wind is available.
Use as much solar as possible where solar is available.
And quit crying over every fricken gnat or lizard that dies from a solar boiler plant; coal and other fossil fuels are clearly doing a hell of a lot worse to the ocean life and other environments.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Another technology furnished an estimate for that: The idea was to create a granite piston 500 meters wide. Water could be pumped underneath with excess electricity during the day and then released at night or when power drops due to cloud cover and low wind.
3 such systems are estimated to be enough to cover all variabilities in a country like germany (at a possible elevation of the piston of 200 meters)
Yes, this is a massive undertaking, but not all that technically complicated. Drilling shafts isn't spectacularly difficult.
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Dec 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Yes, it means the plants will be running 24 hours a day. Of course, this will be done at the expense of the Chinese. Its efficient though, isn't it mate? ;)
I believe the solution to the energy crisis will come from the enormous amount of thermal energy present everywhere on earth - recycling energy is really the best way to go about things, since it does not require an input of energy into the system and doesn't draw sunlight which is required for photosynthesis.
Dec 12, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
You mean except keeping Earth habitable for the human species? Becuase if we don't do all those things then we won't have an Earth to live on.
Those powerplants which can produce the energy where and when we need it are mostly the kind that will destroy the climate (or at least shift it in a direction that will not allow humanity to survive at current levels).
Biogas is an exception - but it alone cannot supply the amount of energy needed. Fusion might be a way out if we can get it to work. (No, don't even start on the cold fusion hoax)
With any other approach we'll be far too busy dealing with one flood, draught, storm after another to even think about such endeavours.
Dec 12, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
"I believe the solution to the energy crisis will come from the enormous amount of thermal energy present everywhere on earth - recycling energy is really the best way to go about things" - anton
Dec 12, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
20% solar.
20% hydro.
20% wind.
20% thermal.
One can kick in where the other fails.
maybe some natural gas backup generators just in case.
Maybe some bio-reactors that can capture heat from bio-process then when the bio-process reaches a certain level return biomass to agriculture.
problem?
Dec 12, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Briefly speaking, the ignorance of cold fusion by contemporary civilization is one of the most tragicomic and decadent approaches, which we ever met in human history.
Dec 12, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
And with magic we could have unlimited energy. Or we could pray for it. Cold fusion is about on the same level of credibility. Putting all your money on that horse is the same as living without power altogether.
So why haven't you invested ina startup for cold fusion yet? Since you're so sure that it will pan out you could be assured of an immense return on investment.
If even proponents like you don't invest - then it's gotta be a hoax.