Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
This is nonsense. The incomming solar radiation can be considered as 1000 watts per square meter and you can factor efficiency detracting from that. Joe Peter Morgan wrote: You would think at 8000 watts per square meter the projected cost of 25% of current Si cells is pretty conservative. Peter From:"Zeke Yewdall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To:Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To:Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject:Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology Date:Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:31:17 -0700 It'll be nice to see some actual modules from that.It sounds similar to the Copper Indium DiSelenide modules that Siemens was producing, but with slightly different chemicals.Unfortuneatly, every sort of thin film PV that has been developed in the past 10 years has been trumpeted as being the great cost breakthrough in PV, because it uses so little raw material and can be deposited on any surface.So far, they all cost about $4/watt, jjust like the crystalline PVI hope they can live up to the hype this time. On 2/17/06, Peter Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology? Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question; Joe First of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100$/Wp. Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost). At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp. Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household? Let me explain this through an example: Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month. Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh. So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400 (this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!) Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply: Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4 The peak-wattage of the module = W watts So the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30 Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000 This gives us, W = 8333 Wp. So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module. Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998. This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above. Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp. If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500. This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400. There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values. Michael Redler wrote: My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers
Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
You would think at 8000 watts per square meter the projected cost of 25% of current Si cells is pretty conservative. Peter From:"Zeke Yewdall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To:Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgTo:Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject:Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technologyDate:Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:31:17 -0700It'll be nice to see some actual modules from that.It sounds similarto the Copper Indium DiSelenide modules that Siemens was producing,but with slightly different chemicals.Unfortuneatly, every sort ofthin film PV that has been developed in the past 10 years has beentrumpeted as being the great cost breakthrough in PV, because it usesso little raw material and can be deposited on any surface.So far,they all cost about $4/watt, jjust like the crystalline PVI hopethey can live up to the hype this time.On 2/17/06, Peter Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology? Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question; JoeFirst of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100$/Wp. Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost). At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp. Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household? Let me explain this through an example: Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month. Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh. So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400 (this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!) Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply: Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4 The peak-wattage of the module = W watts So the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30 Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000 This gives us, W = 8333 Wp. So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module. Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998. This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above. Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp. If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500. This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400. There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values.Michael Redler wrote:My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers. Mike Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, while I would like to to find out more about the alloy solar cells, the rest of the marketing is a bit disengenous. Grid tied PV systems that can provide all of a homes power and interface directly with the existing wiring have been around for at least 5 or 10
Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
oopscan't type80 watts per meter squared ! (not nearly so good...lol) From: "Peter Morgan" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technologyDate: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 15:23:32 + You would think at 8000 watts per square meter the projected cost of 25% of current Si cells is pretty conservative. Peter From:"Zeke Yewdall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To:Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgTo:Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject:Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technologyDate:Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:31:17 -0700It'll be nice to see some actual modules from that.It sounds similarto the Copper Indium DiSelenide modules that Siemens was producing,but with slightly different chemicals.Unfortuneatly, every sort ofthin film PV that has been developed in the past 10 years has beentrumpeted as being the great cost breakthrough in PV, because it usesso little raw material and can be deposited on any surface.So far,they all cost about $4/watt, jjust like the crystalline PVI hopethey can live up to the hype this time.On 2/17/06, Peter Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology? Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question; JoeFirst of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100$/Wp. Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost). At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp. Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household? Let me explain this through an example: Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month. Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh. So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400 (this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!) Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply: Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4 The peak-wattage of the module = W watts So the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30 Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000 This gives us, W = 8333 Wp. So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module. Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998. This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above. Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp. If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500. This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400. There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values.Michael Redler wrote:My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers. Mike Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL
[Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology?Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question;JoeFirst of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100 $/Wp.Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost).At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp.Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household?Let me explain this through an example:Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month.Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh.So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400(this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!)Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply:Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4The peak-wattage of the module = W wattsSo the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000This gives us, W = 8333 Wp.So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module.Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998.This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above.Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp.If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500.This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400.There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values.Michael Redler wrote: My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers. MikeZeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, while I would like to to find out more about the alloy solar cells, the rest of the marketing is a bit disengenous. Grid tied PV systems that can provide all of a homes power and interface directly with the existing wiring have been around for at least 5 or 10 years, and the PV to provide the power has been around for 25 years. Get with the times people. It's like trying to sell a new model of car, and touting the fact that it has doors and seatbelts and a radio as major new selling points too... duh. On 2/17/06, Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This sounds like great news. However, I was disappointed not to see specific informationabout performanceor expectedcost per Watt for the consumer. Can anyoneprovide additional information? Thanks. MikeDoug Kalmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's a bit more to the article. The person who posted it ona list couldn't find hardly anything other than this one article. http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1click_id=116art_id=vn2006020132138C184427 In a scientific breakthrough that has stunned the world, a team of SouthAfrican scientists has developed a revolutionary new, highly efficient solarpower technology that will enable homes to obtain all their electricity fromthe sun.The unique South African-developed solar panels will make it
Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
It'll be nice to see some actual modules from that. It sounds similar to the Copper Indium DiSelenide modules that Siemens was producing, but with slightly different chemicals. Unfortuneatly, every sort of thin film PV that has been developed in the past 10 years has been trumpeted as being the great cost breakthrough in PV, because it uses so little raw material and can be deposited on any surface. So far, they all cost about $4/watt, jjust like the crystalline PV I hope they can live up to the hype this time. On 2/17/06, Peter Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology? Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question; Joe First of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100 $/Wp. Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost). At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp. Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household? Let me explain this through an example: Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month. Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh. So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400 (this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!) Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply: Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4 The peak-wattage of the module = W watts So the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30 Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000 This gives us, W = 8333 Wp. So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module. Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998. This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above. Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp. If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500. This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400. There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values. Michael Redler wrote: My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers. Mike Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, while I would like to to find out more about the alloy solar cells, the rest of the marketing is a bit disengenous. Grid tied PV systems that can provide all of a homes power and interface directly with the existing wiring have been around for at least 5 or 10 years, and the PV to provide the power has been around for 25 years. Get with the times people. It's like trying to sell a new model of car, and touting the fact that it has doors and seatbelts and a radio as major new selling points too... duh. On 2/17/06, Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This
Re: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology
Title: Message The article stated R10 per peek watt = $1.67 (US) peek watt. I does not indicate the actual efficiency or the life expectancy. Historically thin films suffer from high degradation over time. So how knows. MT -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter MorganSent: Friday, February 17, 2006 1:01 PMTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: [Biofuel] new highly efficient solarpower technology Here is a link describing the cost performance and composition of the new solar cells developed by Professor Alberts in Africa. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/features/508857.htm Best Regards, Peter From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: Re: [Biofuel] [solar-ac] new highly efficient solarpower technology?Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:19:24 -0500 Here is a primer for anyone interested in PV technologies that describes how one should approach the question in terms of cost and payback period which was written by a colleague of mine recently in response to just such a question;JoeFirst of all, PV modules are generally marked in terms of peak-wattage (Wp). This indicates the maximum wattage they can deliver. For example, a 100 Wp solar module means it is capable of delivering a maximum of 100W power. If that module costs X dollars, then we say the PV cost is X/100 $/Wp.Crystalline silicon based solar modules usually come with a 20-25 year guarantee. This means, once purchased, they can be operational for this long. (maybe with a very small maintenance cost).At present crystalline Si (which dominates 85% of the PV market) PV modules cost some 5-7 $/Wp.Now the question is, what does this mean to a Canadian household?Let me explain this through an example:Consider a Canadian household that uses 1000 kWh of electricity per month.Take the current electricity cost as 6 cents/kWh.So for a total period of 20 years, the electricity cost for that household is: 20 x 12 x 1000 x 0.06 = $14400(this is of course assuming the electricity cost and value of money don't change over 20 years!)Now let's see the costs if the same household utilizes the PV energy (with a 20-year guarantee) for electricity supply:Say, the average full sunlight hours per day = 4The peak-wattage of the module = W wattsSo the total kWh that can be delivered by this module in 1 month = 4 x (W/1000) x 30Since the household needs 1000 kWh/month, we have, 4 x (W/1000) x 30 = 1000This gives us, W = 8333 Wp.So the household has to purchase a 8333 Wp PV module.Taking an average price of 6$/Wp, this will cost 6 x 8333 = $49998.This is of course much higher than the $14400 we found above.Therefore, the PV cost has to be brought down from the current 5 -7 $/Wp.If the PV cost is, say, 1.5 $/Wp, the above calculation yields a value of $12500.This value is very competitive to the grid electricity cost of $14400.There are two aspects in the cost of PV cells: the silicon material cost and the fabrication technology cost. RD efforts should be focused on reducing both these costs. For photovoltaic devices, the semiconductor material quality doesn't need to be as high as in the case of microelectronic industry for IC fabrication. Attempts should be made to use moderate quality (and therefore, low cost) silicon materials for PV fabrication. However moderate quality silicon contains material defects and impurities. Therefore research efforts should also be focused on developing affordable techniques for defect passivation of the low-cost materials, on new cell designs (i.e., novel device structures) that maximize the energy conversion efficiency, and on low-cost fabrication technologies for solar cells. By tackling both these issues, i.e, material cost-reduction and technology cost-reduction, the PV cost can be brought down to competitive values.Michael Redler wrote: My attitude is a little more forgiving. If all they have to offer is what you mentioned earlier, then I could not have repeated your sentiments any better. But first, I want to see the numbers. MikeZeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, while I would like to to find out more about the alloy solar cells, the rest of the marketing is a bit disengenous. Grid tied PV systems that can provide all of a homes power and interface directly with the existing wiring have been around for at least 5 or 10 years, and the PV to provide the power has been around for 25 years. Get with the times people. It's like trying to sell a new model of car, and touting the fact that it has
