At 4:51 PM 4/11/5, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 5 Apr 2005 09:28:14 >-0800: >Hi Horace, >[snip] >>Say, wasn't there an innovative solar cell manufacturer in Australia that >>was going to convert their factory to all solar powered? As I recall they >>had invented an unusually efficient solar cell. I wonder how that is >>progressing. Maybe Robin van Spaandonk, who posted the original material >>on this, can update us on that? >[snip] >Perhaps this is what you are referring to (sorry, I don't recall >the original post): > >http://www.sta.com.au/ > >I don't think dye cells are very efficient (if memory serves, only >about 8% max, however the cost/watt should be low, because they >don't need refined crystalline silicon). > >Regards, > > >Robin van Spaandonk
Thanks for the response. Maybe this has something to do with what I remebered: At 7:14 PM 5/22/96, Martin Edmund Sevior wrote: >I've just read the annual report on the Center for PhotoVoltaics at University >of New South Wales, in Sydney. These are the guys who hold the patents on the >most efficient solar cells in mass production and who also hold the world >record for efficiency of Silicon solar cells (24%). Last year they obtained >patents on a new technology that will produce solar cells cheap enough to >compete with conventional "Grid connected" electricity. It is based on >multi-layer polycrystaline silicon deposited on glass substrates. These are >only 50 microns thick. They've demonstrated the technology can produce cells >of 17% efficiency which is already greater than their target efficiency of >15%. They expect to produce cells that cost around $2 per peak watt. > >These cells can then be mounted on cheap "non-imaging" concentrators of their >own design that do not need to move to track the sun. Their design >concentrates light by a factor of 4 while only losing 15% of the total >light incident. The concentrators are robust enough to be >used as roof cladding. The combination of the "thin" cells and the concentrator >will reduce the cost of solar energy to $0.5 per peak watt. At this price >solar energy is fully competitive with fossil fuel power. > >They have formed a partnership with the State of New South Wales electricity >Uitility, Pacific Power and are 1 year into 5 year plan to mass produce these >systems. The plan has Pacific Power investing 64 million dollars over the >5 years to bring the technology to commercial reality. They have exceeded their >own milestones in the first year of operation. > >What has this to do with CF? Namely all those guys out their who think they >will make tons of money from their marvellous inventions they can't tell >anyone about had better be aware of this tidal wave from solar energy. If >there is something to CF it will need the full attention of the world's >scientific community and the world's capital markets to exploit. > >I have no more patience with people who say they have fantastic results and >devices but can't let you try it for yourself. I will name names. CETI, >Reed Huish, E-QUEST, Mills and Piantelli, the world doesn't need CF. >It will be ignored until convincing evidence is made widespread AND anyone >who wants to replicate an effect can and does. > >Martin Sevior At 1:32 PM 4/24/97, Martin Sevior wrote: >Gnorts Vorts! > >Some of you may remember that last year I posted some information about >Solar Photovoltaic cells. The gist of the post was that a collaboration >between the Photovoltaics Special Research Center at the University of >New South Wales in Sydney, Australia and Pacific Solar exists with the >aim of reducing the cost of Solar Cells by a factor of 5 - 10 in a 5 year >research and development program. Pacific Solar is a wholly owned subsidary >of Pacific Power the electric Utility of the Australian State of New South >Wales (NSW). They have an installed capacity of about 12 Gigawatts. > >The collaboration has completed the first 2 years of the project and >state "they >are ahead of schedule". The technology they're developing is thin silicon >deposited on glass. Unfortunately details are scetchy because of >confidentiality clauses, but my contacts say they have advanced the field >"incredibly" well. > >A parallel development are the roof tile project, which employs a >non-imaging concentrator to reduce the amount of silicon needed for a working >cell. The device could also be used for a roofing material in one's house. >They've acheived 4:1 improvement in light concentration in a device with >an overall efficiency of 19%. > >At the same time they've developed an invertor that allows locally >generated power (within a property) to be sent out to the grid. The electric >distribution utilities in oz will then give a credit for all energy >generated and sent out to the grid. > >There is already a market in oz from people who are willing to pay extra for >electricity generated within their own property. Systems which >cost about $10,000 give you essentially free electricity, once you take your >credits. So they appear to be priming the market for consumer supported >electricty generation. If they can deliver a system that gives free >electricty for $2000, which appears feasible on current projections, the >system would pay for itself in less than 4 years. At that point the market >would explode. > >I'll keep you informed of progress. I'll repeat what I said last year. The >world doesn't need CF to achieve sustainable economic growth. > >Martin Sevior Regards, Horace Heffner
