Oxford commercializes its 20% more powerful solar panels in the US

https://electrek.co/2024/09/05/oxford-commercializes-its-20-more-powerful-solar-panels-in-the-us/

by peutetre • 2 years ago

91 50 2 years ago

femto• 2 years ago

use land more efficiently

This might not be such a big deal. I appears that it makes sense not to pack panels in tightly, but to space them apart so pasture can grow under them. In this way, the land is essentially "free", in that panels can be put on land that is already being used for pasture. Apparently it benefits the pasture, as condensation from the panels irritates the pasture, leading to more growth [1]. The sheep also benefit from the shelter, the panels providing shade and reducing wind chill, leading to lower mortality. A win for the farm production and a win for energy production [2].

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/jun/...

[2] https://extensionaus.com.au/energysmartfarming/agrivoltaics-...

veltas• 2 years ago

Like a solar orchard

Leherenn2• 2 years ago

Depends where you are. It might not be a problem in Australia, but it very much is here in Switzerland. Space is at a premium, and NIMBYISM very strong (and includes not in my mountains).

Most of the costs of building a solar plant is the years of bureaucracy, and the majority of projects (the ones that get built that is) end up massively reduced in scope. So more expensive but more efficient panels are a boon, and won't change much in the total price.

ggm2• 2 years ago

NIMBYISM strong in Oz also alas.

TobTobXX• 2 years ago

Not-in-my-backyard-ism?

sandworm1012• 2 years ago

Solar panels generally get less efficient with age. So many existing solar farms will be looking to upgrade/replace panels one day, something that generally doesnt require much paperwork.

jajko2• 2 years ago

Swiss could power entire nation (plus export some more) if they cared enough to harness all that kinetic energy of water coming down 3000m from the mountains. That's the last country with renewables problem.

Plus I see tons of solars here on rooftops, on new buildings etc. Colleagues with houses got some tax breaks so they poured some serious money into these and drive teslas basically for free (doesn't change TCO that much given how brutal repair costs or more frequent changes of those big tires & brakes are, but still, they have a warm fuzzy feeling about it).

looofooo0• 2 years ago

It is installation cost what matters longterm. Panels with 20% more efficiency you get 20% more power for the same installation cost. Install cost is already a big portion of the cost for rooftop installation and soon will be for other types.

wcoenen• 2 years ago

the panels irritates the pasture

I think you meant irrigate :-)

sandworm1012• 2 years ago

Yes and no. There is a movement to reduce installation and maintenance costs by blanketing ground with tighty-packed panels. This minimizes undergrowth, reducing the need to mow. Installing panels at only a couple feet off the ground means no digging or machinery during install. Having acres of panels edge-to-edge also facilitates robotic cleaners.

https://www.jurchen-technology.com/products/solar-mounting/p...

torginus2• 2 years ago

Honestly, having recently become an owner of a solar installation, these things are a pain in the butt. Solar panels are connected in series, and the current (thus power) in the series is limited by the least productive element in the series, meaning if you have something as insignificant as a speck of dirt on the panels can limit the current of the panels by as much as 20%.

Having these things unattended in the middle of nowhere would cause major maintenance challenges.

LeonM• 2 years ago

Have you looked into micro-inverters? Where each panel has its own inverter, thus mitigating the 'weakest link' problem as you describe.

Any particular reason why you did/didn't go for a micro-inverter setup?

troyvit• 2 years ago

space them apart so pasture can grow under them.

Vegetables too! This operation is in the town where I live:

https://sproutcityfarms.org/jacks-solar-farm

Colorado is hot and dry, but like you say with pasture the taller panels shade the plants enough to give the them a break from the sun and heat. Too much heat and photosynthesis stops for a lot of plants.

Also just like for pasturing the panels help keep water from evaporating and creates three micro-climates within the micro-climate of the solar farm itself. There's cool and wet on the east side of the panels, cool and dry right under the panels, and warm and wet on the west side of the panels. I'm using "wet" liberally given that we get about 14-17" of precip per year.

Your mention of lower mortality for sheep surprised me, I didn't know it made that big of a difference, but it turns out that people farming veggies get the same benefit. I'm watching the video at the link above and the farmers keep talking about how much better it is working in the shade, and that's a good point. Vegetable farming is hard work.

Colorado isn't light-limited so we can afford this shade. The same can't be said everywhere, but the bottom line is that in many places solar farms can actually help crops instead of limiting them.

hazbot• 2 years ago

All else being equal, spaced out panels or no you would still want as much electricity as possible out of the panels!

pjc502• 2 years ago

Have they solved the perovskite lifespan issue yet?

pwagland• 2 years ago

It would appear that they have made significant strides in this direction: https://www.bnl.gov/newsroom/news.php?a=221018

adrianN• 2 years ago

As panel prices drop labor becomes a bigger factor in the costs. More efficient panels mean less work per watt.

Lio• 2 years ago

I came here to say the same thing. There was an article on HN recently that had a breakdown of PV install costs against panel costs.

The more efficient the panels the less you need to fit, the less space you need and the lower your running costs for things like cleaning and dealing with bird issues.

chickenbig• 2 years ago

less work per watt

Another way of putting it is that the same labour has greater value, and the land is also more valuable!

jakewins• 2 years ago

Volts had a really good recent episode on the state of perovskite PV panels and why they are exciting: https://www.volts.wtf/p/whats-the-deal-with-perovskite-solar

Theoretically they can ~double output of silicon PV, but have historically been hampered by faster degrading; that problem seems now to have been significantly improved

AndrewDucker3• 2 years ago

I am confised. These are 24.5% efficient. Which they claim is 20% more efficient than other commercialised panels.

But over at https://www.cnet.com/home/energy-and-utilities/most-efficien... the top-rated ones are 24.1% efficient. Which is only slightly less.

Anyone able to shed light on this?

dambi03• 2 years ago

They claim the panels produce 20% more energy not that they are 20% more efficient.

AndrewDucker3• 2 years ago

How do they produce 20% more energy in the same area without being more efficient?

JAlexoid2• 2 years ago

Solar panel energy production is their efficiency in converting solar radiation into electricity.

So yes, they seem to be 20% more efficient in converting solar radiation into electricity.

Though I have to say that this is an iterative upgrade, not groundbreaking. If they increased their efficiency by 20% in absolute terms - that would be groundbreaking.

mattficke• 2 years ago

It’s a little misleadingly worded. Looking at the original press release[1] and an earlier announcement[2] I think they mean that they have prototype versions of this panel with 29.5% efficiency, the first production version they’re talking about here isn’t at that level yet.

[1]https://www.oxfordpv.com/news/20-more-powerful-tandem-solar-... [2]https://www.oxfordpv.com/news/oxford-pv-hits-new-world-recor...

AndrewDucker3• 2 years ago

Thank you! That makes total sense, if they have one that's that much more effective then that's very impressive. Fingers crossed they can get that into production soon.

boulos• 2 years ago

The direct announcement (https://www.oxfordpv.com/news/20-more-powerful-tandem-solar-...) seems to have more nuanced wording:

The 72-cell panels, comprised of Oxford PV’s proprietary perovskite-on-silicon solar cells, can produce up to 20% more energy than a standard silicon panel.

I think "standard silicon panel" and "up to" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. They might also be using the lab number (26.9%) rather than the 24.5% number. But then it says:

The first Oxford PV panels available on the market have a 24.5% module efficiency, offering performance significantly above traditional silicon technology.

AFAICT, the real news isn't a massive efficiency win, but that these are actually going into production.

nothercastle3• 2 years ago

Efficiency is really not that important in non space applications. Better to have 2 18% panes than 1 24% and the 18% ones are so cheap right now it’s impossible to compete

dralley• 2 years ago

It matters if you have limited space.

nothercastle3• 2 years ago

Which is rarely an issue in commercial wind farms

Oxford commercializes its 20% more powerful solar panels in the US

Related Stories