As far as the batteries go, the general concensus is that batteries are needed to become non grid-dependent. True you don't need batteries to benefit from solar power, but you'll still be paying the electric company for power you use at night. Not all companies will pay you for excess power sent back their way, and if they do, it's usually at a discounted rate. If you have batteries, you can use your own power at night instead. Total self-reliance is what it's all about.

millaj92

@mcowan3 & @DOCHOLIDAY: in Tampa we get net metering at a reduced rate, not at 100% of retail cost per watt. I pay $.10/KWH to TECO but if I sold net metered power to them, I'd get roughly $.08/KWH for it. I would need to produce more than I use in order to have net zero usage per month.

One of the more expensive pieces of equipment power companies own are peak generators that only produce power during peak use. Most peak use is during the day when the sun is out and companies are open for business. Net metered solar power may reduce the cost of generating electricity for the power company.

@JOHNCON3: bio-fuels are great provided one caveat: they cannot use food to generate power. You never want your food source and your power source to be the same thing. Just look at the economic mess corn-based ethanol is making.

shawn_dude

DocHoliday

great step forward, but we need to be acting even faster.

aznyellojersey

AndersonBMX

Computer_Chef

ripfire

peterng25

jspec1594

zarchitect

ripfire

The government needs to offer large incentives to make this mainstream, fast. They'll save by having healthier citizens and cheaper, more stable energy.

William

Oh and reduce our con ed bills.

frallen20

qwopzxnm

mcowan3

EMoShunz

@tamoko: Imagine punching millions of tiny holes in the sheets, using it as outside window shades that are retractible. It would still allow you to see out, and on really sunny days it would keep cooling costs down while absorbing all that extra energy.

mcowan3

let's say you are at work all day, using no electricity at home. solar panels generate power that gets dumped into the grid, your electric meter runs backwards all day.

then you come home, use electricity at night, meter runs forward. with careful usage, at the end of the month you have no electric bill to pay.

tucker

While that is true, you can also run a system without a battery bank and what doesn't get used by you during the day will get added back to the grid. The power company is required to pay you for your extra power, so if you don't use much power during the day, it is all going towards reducing your power bill. It may even be enough to equal out what power you use at night, so you still end up with a very low power bill and not as big an up front cost. Might let you save up enough to install the batteries later.

Bamboo

EMoShunz

jasonda

I don't think anyone really believes that a bunch of totally stand-alone buildings with their own battery banks is going to be the future of power. Rather, nuclear and hydro would provide constant baseline power delivery, and as demand peaks during the day, solar power generation peaks along with it, fulfilling the demand.

jasonda

"

Want Nanosolar SolarPly™?
Available wholesale to strategic partners.

Want Nanosolar Utility Panel™?
Available wholesale to select system integrators and electric utilities.

Want Technical Specs?
Technical Data Sheet? We presently share product data sheets only under Non-Disclosure Agreement with qualified volume customers. This is so we can extend the period of protection for certain proprietary features we have developed.

all info taken from [www.nanosolar.com]

Somewhat disappointing for being on sale.

godai

Mr_Nowitt

I agree with your comment about biofuel, but what I would really like is to meet the family of four who spends $3,000 dollars a month on gas, and drinks 60 gallons of milk a month. :)

sportsstan

raleel

TickleMeElmo

hmooby

tamoko

Palestina

AlexNC

EMoShunz

Noobs-R-Us

Supergeek817

That means somebody drills for it, refines it, puts in in a truck/ship/train and sends it to a holding tank where it is placed in another truck, poured into a big tank where you pump it into your car & pay a guy who still makes a profit.

Contrast that with feeding a cow some grass, hooking it up to a milking machine, heat it up, pour it in a bottle and ship it (usually less than 100 miles) to a grocery store.

Also remember that a family of four will generally use 1-2 gallons of milk per day vs 30 - 40 gallons of gas.

Bottom line, it's ridiculously cheap to buy gas, and you would need a solar cell the size of a football field to run your car.

Don't get me wrong, I'm way psyched about the advances in solar technology, but long term I think BioFuels are a much more viable energy source.

johncon3

sirwebster

@strider_mt2k: According to their Wikipedia write-up, the company uses Copper Indium Gallium Diselenide in their solar cells. Arguably, its only toxic component is selenium, which is paradoxically an essential nutrient and toxic in large quantity. I wouldn't worry about that.

Supposedly CIGD can achieve up to 19.5% efficiency, half that of crystalline silicon. Hardly great, but I think in this case, the superior cost-efficiency will trump the energy-efficiency.

sumocat

spanktron9

MagnoliaBoy

I had an engineering friend look into these because I was very interested, and he found that they use a cyanide compound in the gallium for the panels. So you are right, but it is a little cyanide amond friends.

I think the real thing holding back mass adoption of these panels is the efficiency. Everything I have read shows extremely low efficiencies (single digits).

spanktron9

MagnoliaBoy

reefdweller

In New Scientist last month they said "The past decade has seen a sea change as inexpensive cells with an efficiency of 20 per cent have become a commercial reality, while in the lab efficiencies are leaping forward still further (even 50%)."

A two-layer polymer PV stack (something like this print-and-go stuff) has been made that reaches 6.5 per cent efficiency, which is a record for plastic solar cells. Wonder what these are capable of.

$2-a-watt is not bad for solar. NewScientist also says that manufacture PV cells at $1 per watt of generating capacity would be cost competitive. However, compare that to the fact that in the US the average price of conventionally generated electricity is around 10 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Windhawk

Watch 'em be full of lead or something else. There's always a catch. :(

strider_mt2k

God made the pretty girls pretty because he likes them more

EMoShunz