Solar panels as inexpensive as paint?

Organic Photovoltaics: PlasmonicEnhanced Organic Photovoltaics:This would be nice, except this idea keeps surfacing every couple of years, and I’ve yet to see one actually become viable. – Anthony

“Organic photovoltaics can be fabricated over large areas on rigid or flexible substrates potentially becoming as inexpensive as paint.”

From the University of Buffalo

Most Americans want the U.S. to place more emphasis on developing solar power, recent polls suggest.

A major impediment, however, is the cost to manufacture, install and maintain solar panels. Simply put, most people and businesses cannot afford to place them on their rooftops.

Fortunately, that is changing because researchers such as Qiaoqiang Gan, University at Buffalo assistant professor of electrical engineering, are helping develop a new generation of photovoltaic cells that produce more power and cost less to manufacture than what’s available today.

One of the more promising efforts, which Gan is working on, involves the use of plasmonic-enhanced organic photovoltaic materials. These devices don’t match traditional solar cells in terms of energy production but they are less expensive and – because they are made (or processed) in liquid form – can be applied to a greater variety of surfaces.

Gan detailed the progress of plasmonic-enhanced organic photovoltaic materials in the May 7 edition of the journal Advanced Materials. Co-authors include Filbert J. Bartoli, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Lehigh University, and Zakya Kafafi of the National Science Foundation.

The paper, which included an image of a plasmonic-enhanced organic photovoltaic device on the journal’s front page, is available at: http://bit.ly/11gzlQm.

Currently, solar power is produced with either thick polycrystalline silicon wafers or thin-film solar cells made up of inorganic materials such as amorphous silicon or cadmium telluride. Both are expensive to manufacture, Gan said.

His research involves thin-film solar cells, too, but unlike what’s on the market he is using organic materials such as polymers and small molecules that are carbon-based and less expensive.

“Compared with their inorganic counterparts, organic photovoltaics can be fabricated over large areas on rigid or flexible substrates potentially becoming as inexpensive as paint,” Gan said.

The reference to paint does not include a price point but rather the idea that photovoltaic cells could one day be applied to surfaces as easily as paint is to walls, he said.

There are drawbacks to organic photovoltaic cells. They have to be thin due to their relatively poor electronic conductive properties. Because they are thin and, thus, without sufficient material to absorb light, it limits their optical absorption and leads to insufficient power conversion efficiency.

Their power conversion efficiency needs to be 10 percent or more to compete in the market, Gan said.

To achieve that benchmark, Gan and other researchers are incorporating metal nanoparticles and/or patterned plasmonic nanostructures into organic photovoltaic cells. Plasmons are electromagnetic waves and free electrons that can be used to oscillate back and forth across the interface of metals and semiconductors.

Recent material studies suggest they are succeeding, he said. Gan and the paper’s co-authors argue that, because of these breakthroughs, there should be a renewed focus on how nanomaterials and plasmonic strategies can create more efficient and affordable thin-film organic solar cells.

Gan is continuing his research by collaborating with several researchers at UB including: Alexander N. Cartwright, professor of electrical engineering and biomedical engineering and UB vice president for research and economic development; Mark T. Swihart, UB professor of chemical and biological engineering and director of the university’s Strategic Strength in Integrated Nanostructured Systems; and Hao Zeng, associate professor of physics.

Gan is a member of UB’s electrical engineering optics and photonics research group, which includes Cartwright, professors Edward Furlani and Pao-Lo Liu, and Natalia Litchinitser, associate professor.

The group carries out research in nanphotonics, biophotonics, hybrid inorganic/organic materials and devices, nonlinear and fiber optics, metamaterials, nanoplasmonics, optofluidics, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), biomedical microelectromechanical systems (BioMEMs), biosensing and quantum information processing.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

61 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Luther Wu
May 13, 2013 3:42 pm

“Organic photovoltaics can be fabricated over large areas on rigid or flexible substrates potentially becoming as inexpensive as paint.”
___________________
Potentially, Willis Eschenbach could be POTUS (and me, too.)

May 13, 2013 3:44 pm

Text for the initial link should be University at Buffalo, not University of Buffalo.

May 13, 2013 4:02 pm

Wouldn’t it by definition of the process be no cheaper than three coats of paint?
You have to be able to get a potential difference out of the “solar cell” somewhere. I can’t think of any way except with two conductive layers with an insulator inbetween.

“Compared with their inorganic counterparts, organic photovoltaics can be fabricated over large areas on rigid or flexible substrates potentially becoming as inexpensive as paint,” Gan said.
The reference to paint does not include a price point [Oh, really??] but rather the idea that photovoltaic cells could one day be applied to surfaces as easily as paint is to walls, he said.

Make that three coats of very expensive paint…..

Byron
May 13, 2013 4:12 pm

Luther Wu says:
May 13, 2013 at 3:42 pm
Potentially, Willis Eschenbach could be POTUS
————————————————————————————
If the head explosions that idea would generate in congress , the left wing media and certain cloistered halls of academia could be contained and released in a controlled manner it would generate enough energy to run the nation for several years , I`d vote for it 🙂

Sean
May 13, 2013 4:13 pm

“A major impediment, however, is the cost to manufacture, install and maintain solar panels.”
Do not collect $200, do not pass Go, Anthony.
The only major impediment to solar power is that the sun only shines on your solar panels for half a day. No matter how cheap or efficient they are they can not generate power at night and they can not be used for base load power generation.
You have been living in CA too long. Next time you feel an urge to advocate for solar power, I suggest that you get inside out of the sun and drink some fluids.
REPLY: And the next time you feel the need to rip me a new one, I suggest that you
1. Note that is the press release wording, not mine.
2. Note that I walk the talk http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/23/an-update-on-my-solar-power-project-results-show-why-i-got-solar-power-for-my-home-hint-climate-change-is-not-a-reason/
Operators are standing by to take your apology.
Anthony

May 13, 2013 4:21 pm

We’ve got enough solar panels on the property here to function completely off-grid if we want, and we mostly do. But finding solar panels in a decent price range was the easy part. Finding suitable batteries at a decent price, and that could be charged during the day and then carry us through the night was the hard part.
Selling the excess power back to the power company is not an option. Because it’s not an even playing field. While they charge the standard retail rate for any power we use off the grid, they only pay wholesale, or below, for any power they buy back from us. So the only way we were able make it pencil out was to go completely off-grid; neither buying, or selling power.
Fortunately, my nephew is an aircraft mechanic for a regional airline. When they switched their entire fleet of aircraft over from nickel-cadmium batteries to lead-acid batteries, we were able to get 60 used, but completely serviceable, 24 volt NiCad Aircraft batteries just for hauling them off.
To sum it up: no matter how good the solar panels get, they still only work when the sun’s shining. Without a practical way to store power for use at night we’d still be at the mercy of the power company.

May 13, 2013 4:33 pm

I have always wondered why solar isn’t paired with a battery, such that the solar recharges the battery from sunrise until about 2 pm, and then combined the solar cell & the battery are used together to provide electricity in the peak hours of a summer demand cycle.

Reply to  HedgingContrarianism (@JackHBarnes)
May 13, 2013 4:45 pm

Hey Jack Barnes, In fact my own system produces enough power during the day to both run the house, and charge a large rack of batteries that carries us through the night. The inverters, and charge controllers are made by a company called Xantrex. It’s a fully integrated system that works together to keep every thing running smoothly.
Here’s one of three large solar arrays that make it work. comment image Note that it does double duty as an equipment shade, or carport.

AJ
May 13, 2013 4:33 pm

Who knew that solar paint researchers could also do stand up comedy…
From the Daily Mail in the UK comes this gem of a quote:

‘By incorporating power-producing nanoparticles, called quantum dots, into a spreadable compound, we’ve made a one-coat solar paint that can be applied to any conductive surface without special equipment.’
He added: ‘The goal is to prepare a solar paint that has long shelf life.‘In our laboratories we have tested the performance for a few days to a week, and we find it stable as long as it is stored in the dark.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2135571/The-end-bulky-solar-panels-New-solar-paint-generate-electricity-roofs-walls-EVERY-home.html

Jay
May 13, 2013 4:48 pm

They are not going to ruin their big government business model of delivering energy to the people with a eyedropper.. Solar tech is to easy to implement on a wide scale.. The breakthrough would be a breakdown on a very important lever of control.. He who has the power, has the power.. Giving it away for trivial political ideals is so far beyond stupid its not even worth talking about..
Remember its the journey that counts in politics, not the destination..
Seriously.. Why would the government invest in cutting themselves out of the loop?
When the breakthrough comes it will be engineered to be dangerous, poisonous or volatile to make double sure their monopoly stays firmly in their hands..
Anything else is a pipe dream..

Peter Crawford
May 13, 2013 4:51 pm

Paint is expensive. If you want a pot of Prince Charles’s ‘Duchy Original Heritage Classic’ in the authentic ‘Grizzly Wife’ colour or possibly the less venerable but very popular ‘Winter Gerbil’ it will set you back about 8 million pounds. He needs the profits so he can tour the UK in his Bentley or Porsche 911 telling the rest of us how to be planet savers like him.

Artfldgr
May 13, 2013 5:05 pm

I work with researchers and they are always blown away that one could do something smaller, easier, cheaper and make a positive contribution, way before one of their pie in the sky ideas is practical for a market. they really really do not grasp that what they develop to work in isolation to achieve a principal, is very hard to put into the real world in practice for thousands of reasons and even those we never know about, given that reality is kind of complicated outside the isolationists lab (and they foolishly dont get that knowing parts dont give you understanding or a model of the whole).
unless solar is a way to bring the cost down of a building element, by making it active rather than passive, its really equivalent to a battery whose output is metered by sun. (unless you get a lot more energy out than it took to make it).
There are other reasons not to bother with solar…
like its indefensible and way too slow to repair / cant be repaired
people worry about wackos and crazies getting to a nuclear plant, or a gas generator.
how you stop the same from wrecking solar plant capacity?
Sadly…. the government subsidies prevent people from looking in other places for things
i have come up with stuff, like many engineers, but nothing you can do with it
pretty simple stuff actually. nothing earth shattering or glitzy like solar cells
but just another way to generate in the right situations, which ultimately is not going to replace oil, coal, gas, nuclear, which technically can generate anywhere being transportable.
solar has its place, but so far i have seen nothing in 30 years that really works and is worth it, but in those places where its really suited… its not a general solution… unless its energy generation is a way to bring down the cost of a building material.
oh… i do have ways that buildings can generate some electricity…. looks good, not crappy.
easy to maintain… but its not going to do more than reduce costs… and its only worth it since it looks good not ill…

Reply to  Artfldgr
May 13, 2013 5:44 pm

Hey Artfldgr,
I have no idea where you’re getting your information from. But my own solar system works great. I live 100% off grid. And I never see a power bill. As for being slow to repair, there’s never anything to fix. The only moving parts in the entire system are some little computer cooling fans in the inverters. And if they were to fail the system would simply sense an over-temp, and go into low power mode until I go out a change out the cooling fan. (A $12.00 part that take 10 minutes to unplug, and change) Our system has been operational now for a little over five years, and has never had a problem. Projected life expectancy of the system before major repair is required is 30 years. In other words, since I am 59 years old, I stand a good very chance of never paying another power bill as long as I live. Although I do have to spend about an hour twice a year servicing the batteries
Oh, by the way. There were no Government subsidies in this installation. I didn’t ask Uncle Sam for a gawdamn thing. The only cost cutting measures used were in taking my own sweet time, and shopping around for two years for the best buy I could find on the panels and inverters I used, and the fact that I fabricated the framework the panels are mounted on from recycled steel, and then did the entire installation myself.
To put that into perspective, I am a little over $22,000 out of pocket for a single family, stand alone solar system that the lowest contractor bid said would cost at least $120,000 installed.

May 13, 2013 5:10 pm

What’s really needed is a roofing surface that changes from low albedo below 25C to high albedo above 25C. Reducing both heating and cooling costs. With the added benefit of surface warming colder climates and surface cooling hotter climates.

May 13, 2013 5:11 pm

But finding solar panels in a decent price range was the easy part.

Hooray for subsidies.

J Solters
May 13, 2013 5:15 pm

Every now and then this site goes whacko-jacko with some hair-brained scheme akin to cold fusion or something. Who’s responsible for this diversion into space cadet quackery? Could it be the owner and minions are secret flying saucer pilot wannabees with both hands on the joystick? Or just injecting needed levity into the AGW tedium?

May 13, 2013 5:17 pm

Denise, I love your carport usage of the cell panels. I was pondering my example from a “commercial” install. ie Megawatt size. However, your example is a full time shift for completely going off grid which is more interesting from my own personal standpoint. Thank You for sharing.
How many KW in total installed capacity do you need for a full cycle system? I am pondering a small efficient cabin on a lake, with a weekend turn key capacity. (solar, battery, emergency small Propane gen set).

May 13, 2013 5:39 pm

There are three things you need to comprehend about solar and wind power:
storage, storage and storage.

Artfldgr
May 13, 2013 5:47 pm

Bradley
I have something that would work, but its not fancy like paint that changes automatically
I have even model tested it… its been available for years, yet no one has figured out the cost/savings advantage… (its GREAT for those one story sprawling buildings with black roof)
but its not fancy high tech

May 13, 2013 5:57 pm

Hi William McClenney,
Most companies consider that an average household can get by on a 1KW system. But to be more realistic, don’t be surprised if you don’t start breaking even, and thumbing your nose at the power company, until your system is up to about 5KW. As it’s been said already in this thread, solar panels only work when the sun is shining. So you’ve got to be able to produce enough power during the day to both run the house all day, and charge a good sized battery system that can get you through the night.
Cheers, Dennis

Resourceguy
May 13, 2013 5:57 pm

There is a winning name in solar but 99.9 percent of the population can’t name it and the DOE motto is We Don’t Pick Winners. I really can’t think of an industry sector reported on worse than this one. Oh well, the one winner will turn heads after the smart money takes most of the gains.

F. Ross
May 13, 2013 6:31 pm

“Fortunately, that is changing because researchers such as Qiaoqiang Gan, University at Buffalo assistant professor of electrical engineering, are helping develop a new generation of photovoltaic cells that produce more power and cost less to manufacture than what’s available today.”

This sounds a lot like the old canard that goes something like ” .. dirt cheap, sustained nuclear fusion power is only about 15 years away.”
Every year it’s only 15 years away.

Chris4692
May 13, 2013 6:43 pm

Am not seeing an indication that the proposed surfaces that are as cheap as paint, will do the job of paint. Do you have to paint, then apply a photovoltaic surface, doubling the cost? When the combination stops doing the job of paint, do you have to scrape off both surfaces? Can you do a touch-up and restore both surfaces, or would such a touch up require the skill of a restoration archivist?

Bruce
May 13, 2013 8:42 pm

” organic materials such as polymers and small molecules that are carbon-based and less expensive”
I wonder how well such material will survive exposure to our southwest desert sunshine.

May 13, 2013 8:44 pm

I just had the best idea. Since the new solar technology is organically based (made from evil carbon molecules), when the solar system doesn’t work as promised, they could burn it as clean coal! Uhm wait, it probably has a lot of toxic elements in it, so strike that thought.

higley7
May 13, 2013 9:08 pm

Solar panels are useful, if cheap enough, unlikely for most with all the ancillary electricals required, for the end user, to take some load off the grid. That would be nice. But, it will only be a local and never substantial effect.
And, if they could only figure out how to legislate that the Sun stay up 24/7. Probably won’t happen.

May 13, 2013 10:35 pm

“Dennis Cox says:
May 13, 2013 at 5:57 pm”
So it was about 93 here today. I left my little window A/C running all day, it’s still on now. I ran the clothes washer, dryer and dishwasher this evening. I have 4 deep-cycle 40-thin-lead/acid plate (deep cycle, large surface area, fast charging) batteries tied into a portable/switchable 4kw solar system and inverter, almost 5kw if the wind is blowing and my 800w wind jennie is spinning, and the batteries went flat about 1.5 hours after I got home. Switched to the grid ever since.
I rent. All of my stuff is modular and relatively portable. Meaning it is all more expensive than if I installed it on a place the bank mostly owns.
Because it does not make sense to “install” my storage subsystems in anything other than Pelican-case style portable/modular units, my costs are that much higher. Including optional hi-efficiency capacitance arrays (to catch whatever the batteries cannot absorb quick-smart), hi-wattage inverters etc., the overhead can, and has been, quite substantial. And insufficient.
The truth is I am just not sure I can afford the storage to afford a modern electrical lifestyle for a single person. With a laptop too.
Just imagine the batteries necessary for even half the US households to achieve electrical parity!
storage, storage, storage…….