Comments on: Transparent solar cells for windows that generate electricity

By: George

George — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 17:57:29 +0000

Mark, were you not distracted a bit in reading Bri’s misuse of “there” when meaning “their”? She probably just mistyped her reply; but that was what pedantic fkwt was commenting on.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 20:37:15 +0000

Great, now we just need a way to paint it onto existing windows and walls and cars and other surfaces, at a tenth of the cost of current solar-power technologies, and all the worlds problems will be solved!
Seriously, though, it would be rather cool.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:03:26 +0000

I’m really not sure what your point here is. Do you mind elaborating?

By: pedantic fkwt

pedantic fkwt — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 13:45:56 +0000

there, their, they’re.

Three words that sound the same, but have different meanings. I cannot stress how important it is to learn the difference between them.

By: Bri

Bri — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 01:22:35 +0000

When manufacturing gets closer to nano scale, these advances will have more benefit. It will be far more cost effective, and far more efficient. Right now it’s like a salmon trying to swim up stream, trying to compete for market.

By: Bri

Bri — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 01:08:27 +0000

Like the emperors new clothes, you see through there false arguments, as they try to make a quick buck

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:34:40 +0000

I can empathize with your viewpoint and it might not be the breakthrough we need at this point. However it is valuable in at least on major sense.

People want their homes, businesses, and communities to look a certain way. Someday maybe that vision will include solar panels but right now they often don’t fit in. Just like a tie can look great with the right outfit but you wouldn’t wear it with your bathing suit solar panels fit on some buildings and not others in the aesthetic sense.

If they were transparent they could coat billboards, cars, windows, street signs, poles, walls, and still also cover roofs without significantly changing the appearance of the surface. This scores solar panels a lot of ‘sexy’ points that could make the difference when they hit grid parity between solar being just another option and it catching like wildfire.

By: josdorpjossie

josdorpjossie — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:22:48 +0000

In order to meet the Dutch energy regulations I have special glass in my windows that heat my house (=let the infra red pass through) better than regular double glass. That combined with the fact that most houses have plenty of room on the roof makes this invention mostly useless.

Maybe it is useful on high buildings in really hot countries.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 04:48:10 +0000

The very first car was so expensive that most people could not afford it. This is true of all new technologies. When more items are made in mass the price falls. This is what is known as “economy of scale.” $/kW is not a static ratio – it is dynamic. As more of an item is made, the cheaper each unit becomes.

By: snake0

snake0 — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 01:29:23 +0000

I second this, even if it would take 5+ years to get back my investment, it would feel very liberating to take myself off the grid (to some extent). Solar power seems to have progressed in leaps and bounds but it seems the main bottleneck may be in battery tech.

Speaking of which, I wonder why there hasn’t been any articles related to the Next Generation Battery conference that was held a few days ago. (I only saw one article on Lithium-Air so far). Kind of disappointing.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:57:42 +0000

Placement of solar panels has not been the problem. There is plenty of rooftop area and unused land available for placing solar panels. The problem that needs to be solved is $/kW. Until solar panels can compete with fossil fuels economically, they will be a niche product.

By: GatorALLin

GatorALLin — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:38:55 +0000

Love to hear more details about the cost per square foot and the possible future release date to the marketplace. So much of these solar powered options seem exciting and then you hear that they cost so much that you don’t get your investment back for 10+ years or the amount of fossil fuels that go into making them are more than the power they save/create. Plants are about 11% efficient, so I would love it if there could be some published standards that lets us truly understand the costs and efficiency of these solar powered options. In no way do I want to sound like I am complaining, I just want some universal info that everyone can easily understand about where the rubber meets the road. I think we all want to switch over and be more efficient, etc…but hard also to clear away some of the bogus hype that has often come with solar or wind power promises in the recent past.

In summary I am just asking for more transparency for a product that ironically is sold to us as being transparent (grin).

By: Gorden Russell

Gorden Russell — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:28:02 +0000

This is great news. I’ve always wanted to live in a geodesic dome. This could allow it to power itself.

By: Sherrie

Sherrie — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:17:49 +0000

Can these be applied to existing windows and how are they wired into the energy grid at the location?