Highest Solar Panel Effeciency Achieved

Let me remind you that SiriuslyWrong has yet to ever say anything positive about the U.S. alternative energy industry. He might be secretly rooting for the Marxist/Communist Chinese. :)

http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com...ref=fpnewsfeed

The highest efficiency for a solar panel has been achieved by Alta Devices, the California-based solar company proudly announced on Monday.

The efficiency rating of 23.5 percent, meaning that the panels are able to convert 23.5 percent of energy captured from the sun into electrical output, was verified by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

“This is the highest solar panel efficiency yet achieved and demonstrates Alta’s progress toward its objective of developing solar photovoltaic (PV) solutions that are competitive, without subsidies, with fossil fuels,” the company wrote in a press release.

Toward that end, Alta Device’s highest-efficiency panel was created based on an innovative, even counter-intuitive idea about how to maximize energy conversion: The panels themselves emit fluorescent light, as TPM reported in November 2011, when the research was in its earlier stages.

The idea makes sense when one considers that conventional polysilicon solar panels and cells lose energy as heat, reducing their efficiency. But when Alta’s panels lose any energy, it’s in the form of external fluorescence, which is less detrimental to the conversion process.

Back in November 2011, Alta’s panels had managed to hit an astounding 28.4-percent efficiency, approaching the maximum 33.5 percent Shockley-Queisser efficiency limit, though that was just for an individual solar cell. The full panel itself contains several cells, decreasing its efficiency slightly.

The panels themselves are made of gallium arsenide (GaAs), a byproduct of aluminum smelting combined with arsenic, a combination that is ideal for solar cell production due to the fact that it can withstand high temperatures and yet be cut extremely flexible and extremely thin, one micron thick in the case of Alta’s panels. That’s about 1/40th the thickness of a human hair, according to the company, allowing it to be used for a variety of applications, where conventional polysilicon panels can’t go.

Alta Devices itself is the result of solar technology research breakthroughs achieved at the University of California Berkeley. The company was founded in 2007 and has received venture capital funding. It plans to produce its panels for commercial use later this year.

Comment:

"This kind of thing is public/private. Research at U Cal was publicly funded in part. This would be anathema to a Republican. This was the kind of thing Solyndra sought to do with its rather radical technology. Solyndra didn't succeed, largely because the cost of silicon dropped but also because the technology did not work as it was hoped. These guys are apparently succeeding. That's a good thing."

Thanks for the lead. I don't think they produce anything at the moment, but we'll be sure to get our materials on their panel.

So glad to see you now understand a little bit about the potential value and importance of public/private partnerships.
Maybe if you had a more positive attitude about U.S. ingenuity in the alternative energy
field and worked a little harder at your job you might not
have to wait for me to bring you pertinent information in your field.
Your persistent oppostion to the U.S. alternative energy industry still indicates to me you are secretly a Chinese Marxist sympathizer. You cant hide. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

So glad to see you now understand a little bit about the potential value and importance of public/private partnerships.
Maybe if you had a more positive attitude about U.S. ingenuity in the alternative energy
field and worked a little harder at your job you might not
have to wait for me to bring you pertinent information in your field.
Your persistent oppostion to the U.S. alternative energy industry still indicates to me you are secretly a Chinese Marxist sympathizer. You cant hide. :)

---

My company is part of that ingenuity azzwipe. You wouldn't know why "inclinded plane tracking" is important to this industry even if you googled it.

You have a funny waying of showing it. You havent published a single postive article on the American alternative energy industry.
And you refuse to acknowledge that Alta Devices has innovated due to a public/private partnership. I understand your ideologically opposed to any such partnership but if you would get off your slacker ass you would have known about this company.

http://mydd.com/Voters Want Obama's Clean Energy Plan
by Heather Taylor-Miesle NRDC Action Fund, Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:10:38 AM EST

Another major poll has confirmed that American voters across the political spectrum welcome clean energy development. It also found that when given the facts, the majority of Democrats and Independents oppose the Keystone XL pipeline for dirty tar sands oil.

The support for clean energy isn’t news—many pollsters have determined that Democrats, Republicans, and Independents embrace clean energy and want to develop more of it. But the timing of this latest poll is instructive.

It should remind candidates that clean energy is a mobilizing issue. It offers a positive way to address voters’ biggest concerns right now: jobs, economic growth, and the health of our families.

But as NRDC’s Action Fund mapped out in the report “Running Clean,” in order to win on clean energy, candidates can’t just name check the issue.

They have to lead on it. They have to offer a vision for America’s clean energy future, and they have to do it before their opponents frame the issue for them.

This latest poll, conducted by Geoff Garin and Allan Rivlin of Hart Research, focused on four swing states: Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, and Ohio. Those same four states have been bombarded with ads funded by oil companies attacking President Obama. And yet the poll found that 45 percent of voters trust the president more than the Republican Congress when it comes to energy issues. The GOP-led House only got 38 percent on energy.

The poll also asked voters if they supported the president’s decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline. At first, voters opposed his decision by 43 to 32 percent. But when pollsters offered more detailed arguments for and against the pipeline, things changed. More voters started to back the president and resist the pipeline.

Of those, 79 percent of Democrats thought the president was right to deny the pipeline, while 9 percent did not. Forty-eight percent of Independents agreed with the president’s decision to reject it, compared to 33 percent who want it go forward. For Republicans, the split was 69 percent to 13 percent.

GOP supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline have been out front with their message over the past few weeks. They have been using wildly inflated jobs numbers and downplaying the fact that much of the tar sands oil would be imported out of the U.S. to other markets. But their story seemed to break through.

Media Matters released a survey analyzing coverage of the Keystone XL pipeline from August 1 to December 31, 2011. A full 79 percent of the time, broadcast news reporting on Keystone XL interviewed a pipeline proponent. They interviewed a critic of the tar sands pipeline only 7 percent of the time.

With coverage like that, it’s no wonder voters aren’t getting the whole story. But when they learn more—like that the pipeline will create as few as 2,500 jobs according to a Cornell University study, will increase gas prices in the Midwest, and send its dirty oil to the “Foreign Trade Zone” in Port Arthur, Texas, where companies get incentives to export around the world, then their opposition grows. The Hart Research poll confirms it.

But leaders have to get their message out about why the dirty stuff hurts America and why clean energy helps it grow. Voters respond to the clean-versus-dirty message, but candidates have to deliver that message clearly and quickly. This isn’t just about the race in November; this is the race every day to frame the debate first.

Obama has done a masterful job of framing the benefits of the clean energy economy. He consistently says clean energy can deliver more jobs, safer air, and a bigger competitive advantage for Americans businesses, and he enacts policies—from clean car standards to incentives for wind and solar power—that are delivering those benefits right now. He believes so strongly in the appeal of clean energy that he made it the topic of his first presidential campaign ad last month.

In the end, this isn’t about campaign rhetoric. It’s about our country’s future. The polls show that Americans trust Obama on energy issues and support his clean energy plan. They are giving him permission to lead the nation into a cleaner future.

The dirty tar sands pipeline has no place in that future. But if Obama continues to head down the cleaner path, voters will follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

You have a funny waying of showing it. You havent published a single postive article on the American alternative energy industry.
And you refuse to acknowledge that Alta Devices has innovated due to a public/private partnership. I understand your ideologically opposed to any such partnership but if you would get off your slacker ass you would have known about this company.

---

I do appreciate the lead, but keep in mind there are 1000's of start ups and even companies that are selling product THAT FAIL. Need I remind you?

As suggested above, I am all for careful and deliberate public / private partnership unlike you who seems to promote throwing money at policy because "it's policy".

This company i posted about has been in the news before. You have never once posted a postive article on alternative energy
so you need to examine your own biases.
Please dont distort my positions. I am not for "throwing money at policy".
I am for wise investment. We just dont believe the same things about investment.
And we certainly dont agree on the importance of alternative energy in this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

This company i posted about has been in the news before. You have never once posted a postive article on alternative energy
so you need to examine your own biases.
Please dont distort my positions. I am not for "throwing money at policy".
I am for wise investment. We just dont believe the same things about investment.
And we certainly dont agree on the importance of alternative energy in this country.

---

THROWING MONEY AT POLICY, JUST BECAUSE IT IS POLICY. That's the way you roll.

In regards to Alta - have a look at this article, and check out the comments.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articl...gen-pv-update/

It's a long hard road like I was saying. I wish them luck. 50 cents per watt would be spectacular.

Doh - Unisolar files for ch11. Seen that one coming. Two or three years ago, their stock was trading at 45 to $70. The writing was on the wall for these guys, and evidently it was for Solyndra too. One of the guys I know out in that area laughed them off saying they were done a while back.