Costing of Suncube and other solar products
0 views
Skip to first unread message
M V Bhaskar
Nov 23, 2009, 10:17:56 AM11/23/09
to India's Energy Future and Sustainable Living
Hi Manu
9 triple junction cells of 1 cm2 - each $10 is $90 for one Suncube -
Rs 4500.
i.e., 10% of complete system cost of Rs 45,000.
moresh kokane says that the PMMA Fresnel lens would cost about $90 to
$135 per Suncube - Rs 4500 to Rs 6750.
>Do not forget the collector material which is the lenses. Fresnel lenses of 1 ft dia. cost around 10 - 15 $ for retail. Multiply that by 9 and add to the cost.
So this is another 10% to 15% of the cost.
Thus the two most important parts (TPV and Fresnel lens) together cost
only 20 to 25 % of the total cost.
This is the reason why most Solar products are so expensive.
The less important parts constitute more of the cost than the core
components.
Reducing the cost of the non core components is an engineering and
mass production problem, rather than a technology problem.
best regards
Bhaskar
Manu Sharma <orang...@gmail.com> Nov 23 10:49AM +0530
> how is it that they are just 10% of the total cost?
>
Hi Bhaskar,
The cells are not the most expensive part of the system.
On another note, GGE even has a provision of allowing consumers to
upgrade
the cells when higher efficiency ones come out, though I do think that
it
will be allowed only after energy payback from the original cells has
been
achieved.
Thanks,
Manu
9 triple junction cells of 1 cm2 - each $10 is $90 for one Suncube -
Rs 4500.
i.e., 10% of complete system cost of Rs 45,000.
moresh kokane says that the PMMA Fresnel lens would cost about $90 to
$135 per Suncube - Rs 4500 to Rs 6750.
>Do not forget the collector material which is the lenses. Fresnel lenses of 1 ft dia. cost around 10 - 15 $ for retail. Multiply that by 9 and add to the cost.
So this is another 10% to 15% of the cost.
Thus the two most important parts (TPV and Fresnel lens) together cost
only 20 to 25 % of the total cost.
This is the reason why most Solar products are so expensive.
The less important parts constitute more of the cost than the core
components.
Reducing the cost of the non core components is an engineering and
mass production problem, rather than a technology problem.
best regards
Bhaskar
Manu Sharma <orang...@gmail.com> Nov 23 10:49AM +0530
> how is it that they are just 10% of the total cost?
>
Hi Bhaskar,
The cells are not the most expensive part of the system.
On another note, GGE even has a provision of allowing consumers to
upgrade
the cells when higher efficiency ones come out, though I do think that
it
will be allowed only after energy payback from the original cells has
been
achieved.
Thanks,
Manu
moresh kokane
Nov 23, 2009, 11:21:56 AM11/23/09
to green...@googlegroups.com
These calculations are true for CPV only. Stirling systems, Parabolic troughs , and other Solar Thermal have a very different cost break down.
What makes CPV promising is the commercial availability of the Power Conversion Unit, very high efficiencies (No other system comes close), and potential modularity.
Manu just sent us 2 implementations which use Water as heat dissipator, their site pretty much says what Bhaskar has pointed out below. It is more of an engineering problem right now for the structure and tracking device. There are possibilities to reduce lens cost if you manufacture on your own on a large scale. Improvements can be made in the tracking and support structure to reduce costs.
Moresh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to Green-India
to discuss India's Energy Future and Sustainable Living.
Green-India
http://groups.google.com/group/green-india
Posting Guidelines
http://groups.google.com/group/green-india/web
To unsubscribe, send email to
green-india...@googlegroups.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages