Alternative Technology Assn Forums

1. 

   adinov
   Member

   The Solar neighborhoods all seem to use the thin film or Kaneka panels because they say you get more power in the hotter months because these panels have a lower temperature coefficient. But I recently did the numbers and they simply don't stack up. The difference between Kaneka and typical crystalline panels in power specs is less than 0.1%/degree C. This translates to a 5% difference in hot conditions. This is less than the power tolerance difference for most panels out there. Given the cost is practically the same, does anyone know if there is another reason why these guys are going this way?

   AD

   Posted Monday 4 Oct 2010 @ 1:58:44 pm from IP #
2. 

   franks
   Member

   You might save on the power derate with Thin Film PV, but you will have more cost for mountings and framing due to the larger area of the Thin Film PVs.
   On fourms, installers they still recomend monocrysyal PVs rather than Thin Film.

   Posted Monday 4 Oct 2010 @ 11:14:36 pm from IP #
3. 

   Lance
   Key Master

   Not sure about the Kaneka, but the Uni-Solar thin film have been shown to outperform crystalline by up to 10% on overall energy generation, we found that with our testing when the ATA was back at CERES. Yes, most thin films are larger than crystalline, but they use about 1% of the silicon or other active material, so they have a much lower emboddied energy. So, there's more to it than just your up-front costs, there's also the energy debt, cloudy weather performance etc...

   Posted Monday 4 Oct 2010 @ 11:41:36 pm from IP #

RSS feed for this topic