Economic Projection of New Solar Electric Technologies as Compared to Traditional Photovoltaic Cells...
If you can't read please download the document
Economic Projection of New Solar Electric Technologies as Compared to Traditional Photovoltaic Cells Joshua Rubin- Departments of Physics and Economics,
Economic Projection of New Solar Electric Technologies as
Compared to Traditional Photovoltaic Cells Joshua Rubin-
Departments of Physics and Economics, Case Western Reserve
University Advisor: Justin Sydnor- Department of Economics, Case
Western Reserve University Fdfdsa Rationale The recent work into
thin film surface mounted solar cells, at the University of Toledo
and elsewhere, shows promise as to expanding the frontier for these
alternative energy sources. A comparison of thin-film and
traditional crystalline technologies over regional requirements and
legislations might reveal the answers to some daunting questions.
Would it be possible to implement either technology setup in urban
or rural environments? On the consumer level, given all other
factors constant which is better for a homeowner given where the
live? How do the environmental factors influence a consumers choice
in photovoltaic cells? In summary, this project will endeavor to
understand the structure of the solar technologies industry as it
exists and what the average American consumer should consider for
their upcoming photovoltaic instillation. Background Photovoltaic
cells, like other semiconductor electrical components, are silicate
based n and p type difference cells. They are traditionally laid
out into a highly rigid crystalline matrix, and are supported by
thick layers of protective glass and promising, and will soon
surpass their predecessors in all factors, given adequate consumer
exposure. Abstract Nontraditional energy sources are a topic of
much debate in the United States, and worldwide. Technologies such
as mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline solar cells, well
established low efficiency and high cost power sources, have begun
to be replaced by a new generation of less efficient but
significantly cheaper photovoltaic cells. In the last decade a new
substrate basted cell has been developed, producing thin film
photovoltaic cells. By comparing the newer approaches to the more
traditional processes, through traditional economic methods such as
cost-benefit analysis, this project will demonstrate the viability
of each setup to the general consumer. Information such as recent
trends, government legislation, environmental factors, and state
electrical costs will provide a solid foundation on which to
compare the technologies. Data gathered from national databases
such as NREL and the EPA, will form the grounding information on
which this analysis is run. This project will use baseline
comparison of the characteristics of thin film photovoltaics, over
state by state differences, to achieve this goal. This project will
present cost-benefit comparisons of the different technologies and
their potential roles as components of the American electrical
grid. Methods Traditional cost-benefit analysis techniques were
used to compare the two overarching technologies involved in this
project. Databases such as the NREL irradiance database and the EPA
photovoltaic cell statics were combined, along with the physical
characteristics of the cells themselves, to run this state by state
analysis. The thermal characteristics of solar cells, along with
standard weathering and cloud cover, was factored into the watts
produced by each cell type in each location. Some underlying
assumptions for this level of instillation were made, such as the
probability of installing cells on a room for a standard consumer
level instillation. Over all instillations the federal and state
rebates were taken into account as well. Results Solar radiation
data for various points across the United States was collected from
the NREL database and averaged for each of the fifty states. This
month by month radiation data was then plugged into the watt
generation figures for both thin-film and traditional cells. A
sample of the results can be seen below in Table 2. From this
monthly energy generation data and efficiency ratings for each a
lifetime generation prediction was calculated to compare between
the technologies. For each state an average cost of electricity
value was used to estimate the consumer benefit for theses cells.
These costs per kilowatt include all state and federal taxes and
other figures that may skew the costs. Several forms of comparison
were the Future Work Photovoltaics have a long way to develop. It
will be a slow process to reach any significant level of adoption
of solar cells. This project is only a very broad look into the
American market for thin-film cells. Other solar techniques such as
collector arrays or solar thermal may hold promise as well. From
here, direct price comparison studies on a area by area basis will
be necessary to determine the best applications of these, and
other, solar technologies. Once thin-film cells have permeated the
market for a few years, and data is available on their
implementation, a time series style regression of the
implementation for future projections would be ideal. The economic
landscape of energy is changing every day, and it will be through
the work of corporate and government capital that these
technologies will blossom. Results (Cont.) Discussion Initial
comparisons between the two technologies for the costs of the
technologies and the investment costs reveal little about the
nature of the relationship between the two. There were several
states in which the traditional cells are still holding their own
against thin-film on a straight cost basis given an identical total
panel area. This split in the states is not surprising as many
factors come into play in this cost-benefit analysis. On other
comparisons such as the value of dollars invested it is clear than,
hands down thin-film cells are better than their traditional
counterparts. One can also observe what appears to be a nearly
perfectly linear relation between the two technologies over the
fifty states. It is interesting to note that the superior
technology is not as prevalent in the market as this study would
suggests is should be. Thin FilmTraditional Month Solar Radiation
AC Energy Value Saved AC EnergyValue Saved kWh/m2/da y kWh$ $ 1
0.77 216 26.78426432.736 2 2.38 639 79.23678397.092 3 4.56 1306
161.9441597198.028 4 5.90 1576 195.4241927238.948 5 5.09 1286
159.4641574195.176 6 5.12 1206 149.5441476183.024 7 5.00 1206
149.5441477183.148 8 4.30 1060 131.441297160.828 9 3.39 836
103.6641024126.976 10 2.21 594 73.65672790.148 11 1.14 308
38.19237746.748 12 0.39 108 13.39213216.368 Year 3.36 10340
1282.16126541569.096 Column1Unit Cost Energy Generated for 1 year
Adjusted Energy Generated Average Cost of Electricity Electrical
Savings for 1 year Savings over lifetime Total Saved State$kWh
$/kWh$$$ Alaska (23,000.00) 13,429 10,340.00 0.12 1,282.16
34,618.32 11,618.32 Arizona (23,000.00) 24,149 17,107.40 0.09
1,454.13 39,261.48 16,261.48 Michigan (23,000.00) 17,078 13,018.50
0.08 1,080.54 29,174.46 6,174.46 Ohio (23,000.00) 16,666 12,576.34
0.09 1,068.99 28,862.70 5,862.70 Rhode Island (23,000.00) 18,634
14,204.52 0.12 1,732.95 46,789.69 23,789.69 Column1Unit Cost Energy
Generated for 1 year Adjusted Energy Generated Average Cost of
Electricity Electrical Savings for 1 year Savings over lifetime
Total Saved State$kWh $/kWh$$$ Alaska (10,350.00) 9,237
7,297.000.124 904.83 21,715.87 11,365.87 Arizona (10,350.00) 16,594
12,060.280.085 1,025.12 24,602.97 14,252.97 Michigan (10,350.00)
11,743 9,184.230.083 762.29 18,294.99 7,944.99 Ohio (10,350.00)
11,459 8,871.940.085 754.11 18,098.76 7,748.76 Rhode Island
(10,350.00) 12,810 10,018.800.122 1,222.29 29,335.05 18,985.05
Table 2: Sample irradiance data, and cell generating figures, over
twelve month period for the state of Alaska Table 3: Five state
sample of cost-benefit analysis for thin-film photovoltaic cells
Table 4: Five state sample of cost-benefit analysis for traditional
photovoltaic cells Plot 5: Side by side comparison of state cost of
electricity vs. array cost of thin-film and traditional PV cells
Plot 6: Traditional vs. Thin-film PV cell total value (unit-less).
(with 45 o line plotted) Plot 7: Traditional vs. Thin-film PV cell
total savings. (with 45 o line plotted) Figure 1: Diagram of a
standard photovoltaic cell. Courtesy http://www.polarpowerinc.com/
and other materials. By comparison, the newer thin- film cells are
extruded in thinner, more flexible layers that can then be attached
to surfaces that traditional cells can not. The increased
flexibility and durability of the newer processes allow for
producers to create larger individual panels, taking advantage of
economies of scale for the larger devices. Although thin-film is
only at 45% efficiency of traditional cells, it has already
surpassed the other in costs, weathering characteristics and
environmental impact. The newer technologies look Economic
Projection of New Solar Electric Technologies as Compared to
Traditional Photovoltaic Cells Joshua Rubin- Departments of Physics
and Economics, Case Western Reserve University Advisor: Justin
Sydnor- Department of Economics, Case Western Reserve University
then run for the technologies. These include the results as seen on
the right in plots 5, 6, and 7. Several ways to compare the results
are necessary as there are many ways to interpret the results based
on which framing one approaches the problem from.