• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Why doesn't every house have solar installed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
For us, we have to apply for a permit, and it will only be granted if you can feed back into the grid, so you would need another meter. It can be worth it if you have a large roof, or yard. But for our setup, it just is not practical.
 
For us, we have to apply for a permit, and it will only be granted if you can feed back into the grid, so you would need another meter. It can be worth it if you have a large roof, or yard. But for our setup, it just is not practical.
You are pretty far north, too. You get 15% less sun power per year than I do, even with a more favorable climate (from a solar radiation perspective).
Seems like a good place to ask this.....
So, planning on doing some renovation, the balcony at my parent's place is on the South West, and gets decent sun. Its roof is a metal sheet, i can fit maybe a 400W panel on there. Is it going to be worth it?

The city has 2 way metering system, so no need of batteries and such, its also in the highest tier in property location, so no power cuts, no batteries required there either.

400W will be worth it? 22.5744° N
Using Kolkata as a baseline, it looks like you will generate around 377 kWh per square meter of panel.

Based on 22.8% efficiency panels, which seems to be the going rate for quality panels. Angling it 45 degrees away from due South will lose approximately 30% efficiency by area.

So 264 kWh per year per square meter. Size your panels and calculate payback period.

Indore is slightly further north, but due to climate it gets more sun. 434 kWh per year, or 303 kWh pointing Southwest.
 
LOL, what?
The converter, batteries, and wiring to your box including electrician labor, a one time cost, will honestly cost more. Of course I should have clarified thats for a completely offgrid setup. Or my neighbor overpaid somewhere.

As for the numbers, I trust my washington neighbor who has already paid for his somewhat, and the IEA a lot more than you, frankly.
 
Last edited:
The converter, batteries, and wiring to your box including electrician labor, a one time cost, will honestly cost more.
Convert and wiring? Not even close. Read the NREL report I posted a link to. As for "batteries", one large enough to replace the array for any reasonable period of time will easily triple or quadruple the costs. So in that case, yes -- but that alters the cost analysis from "possibly economic" to "by far the most expensive" and "wildly impractical".
 
one large enough to replace the array for any reasonable period of time will easily triple or quadruple the costs.
Yes, that's what I said. Going offgrid means covering evenings. I believe my neighbor did not use leadacid but LiFePO too, which probably brought costs even higher.

I've admitted by now the neighbors scenario may be a tad unusual. Which makes you correct for most cases, yes.
 
Solar energy has several problems that currently prevent it from being called green energy.

- The solar panels are produced using coal energy, the form of energy that produces the most emissions into the air.
- The production of the solar panels in China, in particular the refining of solar silicon using significant amounts of chemicals and raw materials, the production of the auxiliary systems, the transport of the materials to Europe.
- Many solar panels contain lead and cadmium.
- There is a risk that solar panels can release multiple carcinogenic substances onto agricultural land.
- The 'waste' that solar energy brings with it through batteries and panels will become larger and larger in the coming years and will be difficult to process without creating many emissions.
- In countries like China and many other countries, they do not have the money to recycle the panels and batteries.
- Small batteries are harmful and should not be disposed of in the waste. However, in many countries, recycling these small batteries is problematic. You can imagine that recycling the batteries for solar energy can be even more problematic.
- On the other hand, experience shows that the power yield is (very) modest under the climatic conditions in Germany.
 
I did a "Deep Research" of ChatGPT on recent solar panel advancements, here is what it said... honestly very impressed...

Also, side note, saw a video recently of a solar farm in China that was self-cleaning solar panels, a brush/water system attached to a tiny solar panel rolled across and cleaned all the main solar panels, and at the end was a station that self-cleaned the self-cleaning brush, pretty fucking amazing. The Chinese are way more advanced than us on a lot of stuff.

I'm honestly very impressed by the Deep Research function on ChatGPT... very cool stuff.


Global Advances in Solar Energy Technologies (2024–2025)​


This report surveys the latest breakthroughs in solar photovoltaic (PV) efficiency, materials, and manufacturing. In 2024–2025, researchers and companies worldwide pushed solar cell performance to new heights with novel architectures and compounds. Solar module production is also evolving with new roll-to-roll and automated processes. Below we summarize key improvements in cell efficiency, emerging PV materials, and innovative manufacturing methods, citing the original sources for each advance.


Improvements in Solar Cell Efficiency​


  • Tandem and Multijunction Cells: Stacking multiple absorber layers to capture more of the sun’s spectrum has yielded record conversion efficiencies. For example, silicon–perovskite tandem cells have set multiple world records. In June 2024, LONGi reported a certified 34.6% conversion efficiency for a silicon/perovskite tandem device (up from 33.9% in late 2023). Hanwha Qcells achieved 28.6% on a full‐area M10 silicon wafer with an integrated perovskite top cell. All-perovskite tandems have also surpassed 30%: the startup SolaEon reported 31.38% certified efficiency for an all-perovskite tandem cell in early 2025. These tandem approaches greatly exceed the ~29% limit of single-junction silicon cells.

Oxford’s multi-layer PV concept: Researchers have developed ultra-thin multijunction perovskite coatings that stack absorbing layers to capture a wider spectrum. This approach achieved an independently certified >27% efficiency (matching conventional silicon) while using an ultra-thin (≈1 µm) flexible film. In field demonstrations, perovskite modules with 4-terminal designs (independently processed top and bottom cells) have begun grid trials. For instance, Hangzhou Xianna delivered four-terminal perovskite–silicon tandem modules for a 50 MW Chinese PV demonstration plant – the first commercial use of such tandem modules.


  • Flexible Tandems and Thin-Film Cells: Flexible, lightweight tandem cells show promise for new applications. The Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) built perovskite/CIGS tandem cells on a polymer lift-off process, achieving 23.64% efficiency – a world record for flexible tandem devices. Such cells can conform to curved surfaces (vehicles, drones, buildings) while reaching silicon-comparable efficiency. In related work, First Solar (CdTe panels) and university partners have pushed thin-film PV limits: First Solar announced 23.1% (CdTe) and 23.6% (CIGS) single-junction record cells in 2024. They are now developing perovskite/CIGS tandems (DOE-funded, target ~27%).
  • Novel Light-Management Techniques: Advanced optical designs have improved light capture. Oxford’s research (above) effectively turns any surface into a solar generator by coating it with stacked absorbers – capturing more of each color of sunlight. This concept could drastically reduce land use for solar farms by harvesting light on vehicles, fabrics, and building exteriors.
  • Pushing Single-Junction Limits: Even conventional cells saw small gains. Laboratory heterojunction (HJT) silicon cells and passivated contacts have inched closer to theoretical limits (~30%), aided by improved surface passivation and contact schemes. (For example, LONGi remains a dual-record holder in crystalline silicon single-junction cells.) Bifacial modules and tracking systems continue to raise real-world output by ~10–30% without changing cell efficiency, but the main leaps have come from new architectures above.

Emerging Photovoltaic Materials​


  • Perovskite Solar Cells: Perovskite semiconductors continue to be the hottest area. Tandem cells above combine perovskite top layers with silicon or thin-film bottoms. Other breakthroughs include stability and composition: Rice Univ. researchers used 2D perovskite “templates” to stabilize 3D FAPbI₃ cells. They reported a 24.1% efficient FAPbI₃ cell that retained 97% of output after 1,000 h at 85 °C, demonstrating long-term durability. Lead-free perovskites are also advancing: U. Queensland achieved 16.65% efficiency with an eco-friendly tin-halide perovskite cell, setting a new record for lead-free devices. Likewise, hybrid 2D/3D tin perovskite films have reached 23.64% (as in the KIER work above), combining efficiency with lighter, non-toxic materials.
  • Organic Photovoltaics (OPV): OPV uses flexible polymers and small molecules. In the lab, the record inverted OPV cell hit 19.47% (certified 18.97%) with exceptional lifetime (over 99% retention after thousands of hours). At module scale, German and international teams set a 14.5% certified efficiency on a 200 cm² fully printed OPV module. They achieved a 15.1% module PCE (with 76% fill factor) using advanced blade-coating and monolithic interconnections. These results demonstrate closing the gap between small-cell efficiency and large-area OPV panels, thanks to scalable printing techniques and new material blends (e.g. PM6:Y6). OPV modules, with inherently low weight and flexibility, are poised for building-integrated and vehicle applications.
  • Quantum Dot (QD) Solar Cells: Quantum dot PV uses nanoscale semiconductor crystals. A Korean team at UNIST developed perovskite quantum dots with a novel ligand-exchange process, boosting organic-cation QD cell efficiency to 18.1% – the highest QD efficiency on record. These cells also showed exceptional stability (maintaining performance after >2 years). Such QDs are solution-processed (spray or printing) and can be coated onto virtually any substrate, hinting at low-cost, versatile PV that bridges between perovskites and traditional thin films.
  • Other Novel Materials: Research continues on emerging absorbers like dye-sensitized and organic-inorganic hybrids. For example, multimaterial devices (perovskite/CIGS) and tandem stacks introduce combined material benefits. (See KIER’s flexible perovskite/CIGS above.) Companies like BOE (a display manufacturer) have also optimized perovskite labs and pilot lines, reporting 26.3% on 25 mm cells and >17% on large modules. They even showcased the first perovskite-charging smartphone prototype. In summary, new materials – especially halide perovskites in various forms – are driving the frontier of PV performance.

Manufacturing and Production Innovations​


  • Scalable Printing and Coating: Scalable fabrication methods are maturing. A Cambridge-led team demonstrated the first fully roll-to-roll printed perovskite module: using continuous industrial printing, 1,600 cells were optimized to yield 15.5% efficiency (cells) and 11.0% for the assembled module. Crucially, they replaced expensive vacuum metal contacts with printed carbon electrodes to enable ambient-air, high-speed processing. They estimate manufacturing costs of ≈$0.7/W at 1,000 MWp/year throughput, with further reductions possible. Experts emphasize that roll-to-roll (R2R) printing can cut costs by eliminating batch steps and precious metals, promoting cheap inks (e.g. carbon) and continuous automation.
  • Novel Contact Metallization: To reduce module cost, researchers are replacing silver with copper or carbon. Fraunhofer ISE’s Kumelle project (Germany) is developing copper-printing techniques (screen, FlexTrail inkjet, gravure) for tandem cells. Early tests show well-printed copper contacts (using ISE’s FlexTrail method) can match or even exceed the efficiency of traditional silver fingers, while dramatically cutting material cost. These methods are being validated on TOPCon and HJT silicon cells in Fraunhofer’s PV-TEC pilot line.
  • Automation and AI in Factories: Industrial PV lines are becoming smarter. India’s Goldi Solar opened a 14 GW AI-powered module factory in 2025. This plant uses robotic stringers (10,000 cells/hour) and AI-driven optical inspection to assemble solar cells with minimal error. Automated robots lay encapsulant (EVA) and perform electroluminescence QA, ensuring consistent quality. Such automation increases throughput and reduces waste. Globally, companies like First Solar are also expanding thin-film capacity (target 25 GW/year by 2026) and investing in big R&D centers (e.g. Ohio, 120,000 m²) for pilot tandem module production. Overall, PV factories are integrating machine vision, robotics, and digital control to slash per-panel costs and accelerate production ramps.
  • New Production Lines and Pilot Plants: Several pilot manufacturing lines are now operational. In China, startup Sunshine built a multi-megawatt pilot line for perovskite modules (vapor-assisted printing on 900 cm² modules). They have a 25.05% certified perovskite cell and plan first commercial module rolls in 2025. BOE (China) reported pilot lines achieving 20.8% on 300×300 mm cells and 17.5% on 1.2×2.4 m perovskite modules – the largest-area perovskite modules made to date. In South Korea, Hanwha Qcells operates a pilot perovskite tandem cell line at its Jincheon plant, preparing for commercialization of high-efficiency tandem panels. These pilots show industry moving from lab to factory for next-gen PV.
  • Cost-Reduction Strategies: Alongside equipment, cost reduction comes from materials and design. Using carbon and copper contacts (above) cuts precious-metal costs. Higher efficiency itself lowers cost per Watt. Bulk silicon supply and standard wafer sizes (M10/G12) continue to scale for silicon lines. Meanwhile, new processes like blade coating (used in the OPV module above) use ambient air, fast drying, and non-toxic solvents to speed low-cost module production.

Pilot Projects and Commercial Deployments​


  • Grid-Connected Demonstrations: New solar technologies are reaching the field. As noted, Xianna’s 4-terminal tandem modules were delivered for a 50 MW Chinese PV demonstration (grid-connected by late 2024). In the U.S., utility-scale developers are planning projects with bifacial and possibly tandem panels. Hanwha has completed a 50 MW conventional solar plant in California, and is active in partnering on energy storage and smart-grid systems to complement PV.
  • Consumer and BIPV Products: Some breakthroughs are targeting consumer devices. BOE and Infinix unveiled a concept solar-charging smartphone (using BOE’s perovskite) as an R&D prototype. The ultra-thin Oxford coating suggests future integration into electronics or clothing. Organic PV modules (being intrinsically flexible and see-through) are being considered for building-integrated applications (windows, facades) and small off-grid systems.
  • Notable Institutions and Collaborations: Academic and industry teams worldwide are contributing. In the US, NREL has published roadmap papers on tandem PV and is funding thin-film development. In Europe, Fraunhofer ISE, ZSW (Germany), and Cambridge (UK) lead manufacturing R&D. Asian players like LONGi, Hanwha (S. Korea), and multiple Chinese consortiums (e.g. Xianna, Sunshine, BOE) are pushing record cells and scaling. Government programs (EU, US DOE, China’s subsidies) and venture funding are accelerating pilot lines. International conferences (e.g. HOPV16, ISPV24) routinely report these advances, reflecting a vibrant global R&D ecosystem.

Each of these advancements is detailed in the cited sources above. Together, they paint a picture of a rapidly maturing solar technology landscape: researchers are delivering lab-cell efficiencies once thought impossible, and industry is closing the gap to mass production. In 2024–2025 we see unprecedented activity in tandem architectures, perovskite and quantum-dot materials, and automated manufacturing – all driving towards cheaper, higher-output solar power worldwide.
 
I did a "Deep Research" of ChatGPT on recent solar panel advancements, here is what it said... honestly very impressed...

Also, side note, saw a video recently of a solar farm in China that was self-cleaning solar panels, a brush/water system attached to a tiny solar panel rolled across and cleaned all the main solar panels, and at the end was a station that self-cleaned the self-cleaning brush, pretty fucking amazing. The Chinese are way more advanced than us on a lot of stuff.

I'm honestly very impressed by the Deep Research function on ChatGPT... very cool stuff.


Global Advances in Solar Energy Technologies (2024–2025)​


This report surveys the latest breakthroughs in solar photovoltaic (PV) efficiency, materials, and manufacturing. In 2024–2025, researchers and companies worldwide pushed solar cell performance to new heights with novel architectures and compounds. Solar module production is also evolving with new roll-to-roll and automated processes. Below we summarize key improvements in cell efficiency, emerging PV materials, and innovative manufacturing methods, citing the original sources for each advance.


Improvements in Solar Cell Efficiency​


  • Tandem and Multijunction Cells: Stacking multiple absorber layers to capture more of the sun’s spectrum has yielded record conversion efficiencies. For example, silicon–perovskite tandem cells have set multiple world records. In June 2024, LONGi reported a certified 34.6% conversion efficiency for a silicon/perovskite tandem device (up from 33.9% in late 2023). Hanwha Qcells achieved 28.6% on a full‐area M10 silicon wafer with an integrated perovskite top cell. All-perovskite tandems have also surpassed 30%: the startup SolaEon reported 31.38% certified efficiency for an all-perovskite tandem cell in early 2025. These tandem approaches greatly exceed the ~29% limit of single-junction silicon cells.

Oxford’s multi-layer PV concept: Researchers have developed ultra-thin multijunction perovskite coatings that stack absorbing layers to capture a wider spectrum. This approach achieved an independently certified >27% efficiency (matching conventional silicon) while using an ultra-thin (≈1 µm) flexible film. In field demonstrations, perovskite modules with 4-terminal designs (independently processed top and bottom cells) have begun grid trials. For instance, Hangzhou Xianna delivered four-terminal perovskite–silicon tandem modules for a 50 MW Chinese PV demonstration plant – the first commercial use of such tandem modules.


  • Flexible Tandems and Thin-Film Cells: Flexible, lightweight tandem cells show promise for new applications. The Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) built perovskite/CIGS tandem cells on a polymer lift-off process, achieving 23.64% efficiency – a world record for flexible tandem devices. Such cells can conform to curved surfaces (vehicles, drones, buildings) while reaching silicon-comparable efficiency. In related work, First Solar (CdTe panels) and university partners have pushed thin-film PV limits: First Solar announced 23.1% (CdTe) and 23.6% (CIGS) single-junction record cells in 2024. They are now developing perovskite/CIGS tandems (DOE-funded, target ~27%).
  • Novel Light-Management Techniques: Advanced optical designs have improved light capture. Oxford’s research (above) effectively turns any surface into a solar generator by coating it with stacked absorbers – capturing more of each color of sunlight. This concept could drastically reduce land use for solar farms by harvesting light on vehicles, fabrics, and building exteriors.
  • Pushing Single-Junction Limits: Even conventional cells saw small gains. Laboratory heterojunction (HJT) silicon cells and passivated contacts have inched closer to theoretical limits (~30%), aided by improved surface passivation and contact schemes. (For example, LONGi remains a dual-record holder in crystalline silicon single-junction cells.) Bifacial modules and tracking systems continue to raise real-world output by ~10–30% without changing cell efficiency, but the main leaps have come from new architectures above.

Emerging Photovoltaic Materials​


  • Perovskite Solar Cells: Perovskite semiconductors continue to be the hottest area. Tandem cells above combine perovskite top layers with silicon or thin-film bottoms. Other breakthroughs include stability and composition: Rice Univ. researchers used 2D perovskite “templates” to stabilize 3D FAPbI₃ cells. They reported a 24.1% efficient FAPbI₃ cell that retained 97% of output after 1,000 h at 85 °C, demonstrating long-term durability. Lead-free perovskites are also advancing: U. Queensland achieved 16.65% efficiency with an eco-friendly tin-halide perovskite cell, setting a new record for lead-free devices. Likewise, hybrid 2D/3D tin perovskite films have reached 23.64% (as in the KIER work above), combining efficiency with lighter, non-toxic materials.
  • Organic Photovoltaics (OPV): OPV uses flexible polymers and small molecules. In the lab, the record inverted OPV cell hit 19.47% (certified 18.97%) with exceptional lifetime (over 99% retention after thousands of hours). At module scale, German and international teams set a 14.5% certified efficiency on a 200 cm² fully printed OPV module. They achieved a 15.1% module PCE (with 76% fill factor) using advanced blade-coating and monolithic interconnections. These results demonstrate closing the gap between small-cell efficiency and large-area OPV panels, thanks to scalable printing techniques and new material blends (e.g. PM6:Y6). OPV modules, with inherently low weight and flexibility, are poised for building-integrated and vehicle applications.
  • Quantum Dot (QD) Solar Cells: Quantum dot PV uses nanoscale semiconductor crystals. A Korean team at UNIST developed perovskite quantum dots with a novel ligand-exchange process, boosting organic-cation QD cell efficiency to 18.1% – the highest QD efficiency on record. These cells also showed exceptional stability (maintaining performance after >2 years). Such QDs are solution-processed (spray or printing) and can be coated onto virtually any substrate, hinting at low-cost, versatile PV that bridges between perovskites and traditional thin films.
  • Other Novel Materials: Research continues on emerging absorbers like dye-sensitized and organic-inorganic hybrids. For example, multimaterial devices (perovskite/CIGS) and tandem stacks introduce combined material benefits. (See KIER’s flexible perovskite/CIGS above.) Companies like BOE (a display manufacturer) have also optimized perovskite labs and pilot lines, reporting 26.3% on 25 mm cells and >17% on large modules. They even showcased the first perovskite-charging smartphone prototype. In summary, new materials – especially halide perovskites in various forms – are driving the frontier of PV performance.

Manufacturing and Production Innovations​


  • Scalable Printing and Coating: Scalable fabrication methods are maturing. A Cambridge-led team demonstrated the first fully roll-to-roll printed perovskite module: using continuous industrial printing, 1,600 cells were optimized to yield 15.5% efficiency (cells) and 11.0% for the assembled module. Crucially, they replaced expensive vacuum metal contacts with printed carbon electrodes to enable ambient-air, high-speed processing. They estimate manufacturing costs of ≈$0.7/W at 1,000 MWp/year throughput, with further reductions possible. Experts emphasize that roll-to-roll (R2R) printing can cut costs by eliminating batch steps and precious metals, promoting cheap inks (e.g. carbon) and continuous automation.
  • Novel Contact Metallization: To reduce module cost, researchers are replacing silver with copper or carbon. Fraunhofer ISE’s Kumelle project (Germany) is developing copper-printing techniques (screen, FlexTrail inkjet, gravure) for tandem cells. Early tests show well-printed copper contacts (using ISE’s FlexTrail method) can match or even exceed the efficiency of traditional silver fingers, while dramatically cutting material cost. These methods are being validated on TOPCon and HJT silicon cells in Fraunhofer’s PV-TEC pilot line.
  • Automation and AI in Factories: Industrial PV lines are becoming smarter. India’s Goldi Solar opened a 14 GW AI-powered module factory in 2025. This plant uses robotic stringers (10,000 cells/hour) and AI-driven optical inspection to assemble solar cells with minimal error. Automated robots lay encapsulant (EVA) and perform electroluminescence QA, ensuring consistent quality. Such automation increases throughput and reduces waste. Globally, companies like First Solar are also expanding thin-film capacity (target 25 GW/year by 2026) and investing in big R&D centers (e.g. Ohio, 120,000 m²) for pilot tandem module production. Overall, PV factories are integrating machine vision, robotics, and digital control to slash per-panel costs and accelerate production ramps.
  • New Production Lines and Pilot Plants: Several pilot manufacturing lines are now operational. In China, startup Sunshine built a multi-megawatt pilot line for perovskite modules (vapor-assisted printing on 900 cm² modules). They have a 25.05% certified perovskite cell and plan first commercial module rolls in 2025. BOE (China) reported pilot lines achieving 20.8% on 300×300 mm cells and 17.5% on 1.2×2.4 m perovskite modules – the largest-area perovskite modules made to date. In South Korea, Hanwha Qcells operates a pilot perovskite tandem cell line at its Jincheon plant, preparing for commercialization of high-efficiency tandem panels. These pilots show industry moving from lab to factory for next-gen PV.
  • Cost-Reduction Strategies: Alongside equipment, cost reduction comes from materials and design. Using carbon and copper contacts (above) cuts precious-metal costs. Higher efficiency itself lowers cost per Watt. Bulk silicon supply and standard wafer sizes (M10/G12) continue to scale for silicon lines. Meanwhile, new processes like blade coating (used in the OPV module above) use ambient air, fast drying, and non-toxic solvents to speed low-cost module production.

Pilot Projects and Commercial Deployments​


  • Grid-Connected Demonstrations: New solar technologies are reaching the field. As noted, Xianna’s 4-terminal tandem modules were delivered for a 50 MW Chinese PV demonstration (grid-connected by late 2024). In the U.S., utility-scale developers are planning projects with bifacial and possibly tandem panels. Hanwha has completed a 50 MW conventional solar plant in California, and is active in partnering on energy storage and smart-grid systems to complement PV.
  • Consumer and BIPV Products: Some breakthroughs are targeting consumer devices. BOE and Infinix unveiled a concept solar-charging smartphone (using BOE’s perovskite) as an R&D prototype. The ultra-thin Oxford coating suggests future integration into electronics or clothing. Organic PV modules (being intrinsically flexible and see-through) are being considered for building-integrated applications (windows, facades) and small off-grid systems.
  • Notable Institutions and Collaborations: Academic and industry teams worldwide are contributing. In the US, NREL has published roadmap papers on tandem PV and is funding thin-film development. In Europe, Fraunhofer ISE, ZSW (Germany), and Cambridge (UK) lead manufacturing R&D. Asian players like LONGi, Hanwha (S. Korea), and multiple Chinese consortiums (e.g. Xianna, Sunshine, BOE) are pushing record cells and scaling. Government programs (EU, US DOE, China’s subsidies) and venture funding are accelerating pilot lines. International conferences (e.g. HOPV16, ISPV24) routinely report these advances, reflecting a vibrant global R&D ecosystem.

Each of these advancements is detailed in the cited sources above. Together, they paint a picture of a rapidly maturing solar technology landscape: researchers are delivering lab-cell efficiencies once thought impossible, and industry is closing the gap to mass production. In 2024–2025 we see unprecedented activity in tandem architectures, perovskite and quantum-dot materials, and automated manufacturing – all driving towards cheaper, higher-output solar power worldwide.
Those panels won't do much good in the UK when the Brits figure out how to dim sunlite ... too many sunny days in the UK I'm guessing so now the Brits are going to fix that.
 
UK is getting more extreme weather. we used to have mild winters combined with mild summers. Summers have become more and more extreme, and the past 6 months has been crazy as well, straight from a harsh winter to a heat wave within 2-3 weeks, spring got skipped. My room went from 12C in mid March to 28C (no heating) mid April.

With that put aside though, solar heating for the UK will be problematic due to our unstable weather patters, we are often under the jet stream, especially at the west of the country. The east, south east can get really long sunny spells in summer, but even then its only reliably 3-4 months a year.

This stuff is starting to feel like a lot of expense for mediocre returns, and its becoming more and more of a talking point over here. New houses should probably come with solar preinstalled, but the issue is going to be who pays for it to be installed on existing older builds.
 
UK is getting more extreme weather. we used to have mild winters combined with mild summers. Summers have become more and more extreme, and the past 6 months has been crazy as well, straight from a harsh winter to a heat wave within 2-3 weeks, spring got skipped. My room went from 12C in mid March to 28C (no heating) mid April.
Also, that extreme summer lasted for 2 weeks last year. You can't even plan a proper visit to the beach like that, not to mention investing in solar panels.
 
Let's stick to solar discussions and not weather patterns (solar still work with light cloud cover). The science forum deserves a bit more constructive tech talk.

Thanks.
 

I like the notion of what do you do if you have an excess of Solar? Maybe the grid could find some inspiration from that book "Finding the Mother Tree: Discovering How the Forest Is Wired for Intelligence and Healing"... (food wastage, refrigeration, and local supply chains spring to mind)

 
Last edited:
Apologies Why_Me and Jtuck9 for the deletions - but it's a topic about (not just) solar, but solar on houses. There are always tangents, but try to keep on the direct topic.
 
Let's stick to solar discussions and not weather patterns (solar still work with light cloud cover). The science forum deserves a bit more constructive tech talk.

Thanks.
It's impossible to deny that Britain -- and many other locales -- often suffer from much more than "light" cloud cover, or that this doesn't impact a discussion on solar power.

To make the point, the exact opposite problem is yet another reason why grid solar is so problematic. It seems a simple solution to compensate for low-light and low-wind periods by just adding more solar panels and wind farms. But then, you have periods where the grid generates too much -- and that's just as bad as too little, as evidenced by the recent blackout in Spain and Portugal:

"..A few minutes before the outage, fluctuations were observed in the grid, and there was a spike in wind power generation, which had been very low until then. France suddenly stopped importing electricity from Spain, perhaps because it detected a problem in the peninsular grid, and this deepened the imbalance between supply and demand ... solar photovoltaics [then] dropped sharply from generating 18,000 MW to just 8,000 MW in just a few seconds. Since the sun had not vanished, it must have been an automated command that switched off thousands of solar facilities..... the problem may have been triggered by the disconnection of some solar plants in southwest Spain, but the grid would normally be able to balance this out through regulation – the mechanism for balancing supply and demand. This was being done mainly with hydropower, as normal, but there came a point when this source had exhausted its adjustment capacity...."


Apologies Why_Me and Jtuck9 for the deletions - but it's a topic about (not just) solar, but solar on houses. There are always tangents, but try to keep on the direct topic.
Every home I know that has solar feeds the overage into the grid, and then draws from that grid when solar isn't available. It's impossible to discuss one without the other -- unless you simply don't wish to face the relevant conclusions.
 
Last edited:
You're blind if you deny that Britain -- and many other locales -- often suffer from much more than "light" cloud cover, or that this doesn't impact a discussion on solar power.

To make the point, the exact opposite problem is yet another reason why grid solar is so problematic. It seems a simple solution to compensate for low-light and low-wind periods by just adding more solar panels and wind farms. But then, you have periods where the grid generates too much -- and that's just as bad as too little, as evidenced by the recent blackout in Spain and Portugal:

"..A few minutes before the outage, fluctuations were observed in the grid, and there was a spike in wind power generation, which had been very low until then. France suddenly stopped importing electricity from Spain, perhaps because it detected a problem in the peninsular grid, and this deepened the imbalance between supply and demand ... solar photovoltaics [then] dropped sharply from generating 18,000 MW to just 8,000 MW in just a few seconds. Since the sun had not vanished, it must have been an automated command that switched off thousands of solar facilities..... the problem may have been triggered by the disconnection of some solar plants in southwest Spain, but the grid would normally be able to balance this out through regulation – the mechanism for balancing supply and demand. This was being done mainly with hydropower, as normal, but there came a point when this source had exhausted its adjustment capacity...."



Every home I know that has solar feeds the overage into the grid, and then draws from that grid when solar isn't available. It's impossible to discuss one without the other -- unless you simply don't wish to face the relevant conclusions.

No need to be rude.

However, you say this:
It seems a simple solution to compensate for low-light and low-wind periods by just adding more solar panels and wind farms. But then, you have periods where the grid generates too much -- and that's just as bad as too little, as evidenced by the recent blackout in Spain and Portugal:

But the source you quoted says this:
This unusual situation points to a perfect storm of poor grid management and inadequate connections of solar facilities to the grid, as well as other unknown faults. In my opinion, there is a good chance that the computer programmes in charge of managing these systems played an important role, as they may not have been suitably prepared for these kinds of situations.

So, it's not there was too much solar, it's that the grid is poorly managed, possibly as such infrastruture has been rushed due to Spain's hard push for renewables. And this is the part most nations are too slow with - grid infrastructure and planning to mitigate problems.

---

Household solar would be best used for household generation, and not grid feedback, and where possible, stored locally in battery systems. Though, that's my view. But, again, household has problems where placement of panels doesn't suit the path of the sun.
 
No need to be rude.
Apologies; which is why I edited that out even before your reply.

But the source you quoted says this:


So, it's not there was too much solar, it's that the grid is poorly managed,
The grid failed not because it was "poorly managed" -- it generated too much solar, period. That tripped overloads all across the Iberian Peninsula. No amount of "management" could have prevented that. In periods where "just a little" extra power is generated, it can be stored through pumped hydro, but this event quickly exhausted that reserve. Any industrial power engineer knows that the real problem utilities face is NOT generating the power, it's matching supply with demand in real time, second-by-second. It's no accident that this event occurred just three days after Spain proudly announced it had, for a brief period, entirely powered its grid through renewables.

One can always say "just add more pumped hydro". Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that hydroelectric power is a source more hated by environmentalists than nuclear and fossil fuels. And, if we presume a grid powered 100% by non-demand sources like wind and solar, the Iberian Peninsula would need more than 25X the pumped hydro capacity it now has -- at monstrous cost. This is why nations like Germany went from the cheapest electricity in Europe to one of the most expensive -- because grid wind and solar are cheap when they're performing peak shaving, but the cost grows dramatically as you continue to replace controllable demand-based sources with these uncontrollable variables.
 
Apologies; which is why I edited that out even before your reply.


The grid failed not because it was "poorly managed" -- it generated too much solar, period. That tripped overloads all across the Iberian Peninsula. No amount of "management" could have prevented that. In periods where "just a little" extra power is generated, it can be stored through pumped hydro, but this event quickly exhausted that reserve. Any industrial power engineer knows that the real problem utilities face is NOT generating the power, it's matching supply with demand in real time, second-by-second. It's no accident that this event occurred just three days after Spain proudly announced it had, for a brief period, entirely powered its grid through renewables.

One can always say "just add more pumped hydro". Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that hydroelectric power is a source more hated by environmentalists than nuclear and fossil fuels. And, if we presume a grid powered 100% by non-demand sources like wind and solar, the Iberian Peninsula would need more than 25X the pumped hydro capacity it now has -- at monstrous cost. This is why nations like Germany went from the cheapest electricity in Europe to one of the most expensive -- because grid wind and solar are cheap when they're performing peak shaving, but the cost grows dramatically as you continue to replace controllable demand-based sources with these uncontrollable variables.

The article you quoted does not say that (the bold part) Unequiviocally, it does not say that.


It says this:
A few minutes before the outage, fluctuations were observed in the grid, and there was a spike in wind power generation
France suddenly stopped importing electricity from Spain, perhaps because it detected a problem in the peninsular grid, and this deepened the imbalance between supply and demand.
At that point, the few operating nuclear power plants received an overload signal. In accordance with protocol, control rods were inserted and they were automatically shut down.
Most pertinent to this discussion:
But what was most surprising was the behaviour of solar photovoltaics, which dropped sharply from generating 18,000 MW to just 8,000 MW in just a few seconds.
So when wind spiked, Nuclear was shut down, and solar tanked - it didn't generate too much, as you say. The article suggests mistakes were made in the shutting down of the photo-voltaic input (as the cloud cover wasn't a factor.)

The problem, ironically, was solar. But it wasn't about grid power generation. It was because solar has been producing cheap energy, making Nuclear plants far less cost effective to run (from the article), so the expected back up wasn't there when the power dipped. Also, prior to the event, as there was an energy surplus, REE was offloading to other countries, and they had filled the hydro basins to the limit - so when the spike happened, there was no way to discharge via pumped storage. France shutting down their import connection played a role in creating the fluctuating Spanish load.

Solar energy during the sunniest hours distorts all offers (at price or negative), making more stable sources economically unviable


But I'll repeat my previous posts last point. There isn't any reason why home solar can't be integrated with battery storage for domestic use (off grid). Baseline grid access would still be likely for most, but home solar isn't the white elephant it used to be. It's not a miracle, but it offers something.
 
The article you quoted does not say that (the bold part) Unequiviocally, it does not say that.: Most pertinent to this discussion ...when wind spiked, Nuclear was shut down, and solar tanked

The baseline nuclear was reduced due to an excess of non-demand sources (wind and solar). And you failed to include why the solar "tanked", and what happened after:

"...[solar] dropped sharply from generating 18,000 MW to just 8,000 MW in just a few seconds. Since the sun had not vanished, it must have been an automated command that switched off thousands of solar facilities ... The problem may have been triggered by the disconnection of some solar plants in southwest Spain, but the grid would normally be able to balance this out through regulation – the mechanism for balancing supply and demand. This was being done mainly with hydropower, as normal, but there came a point when this source had exhausted its adjustment capacity..... All sources feeding power into the grid must be synchronised at the same frequency, 50 Hertz. To facilitate this synchronisation, stable base-load power is required, which is normally provided by nuclear and other large gas and hydroelectric facilities. These sources act as a natural buffer against disturbances, helping to keep the frequency stable in the face of sudden changes in generation or demand...However, variable renewable sources, such as solar photovoltaic, do not have this capability.... At 12:33 there was little by way of stable source base in the Spanish grid and, in addition, the few nuclear power plants that were operating had been switched off ...Hydroelectric facilities were at the limit of their regulation capacity, and no provision had been made for the availability of gas-fired plants......"

In summary: wind generation increased, while demand did not. To compensate, the grid offlined stable demand sources (nuclear) and thus became even more unstable. The solar overage could no longer be stabilized, and was automatically offlined. This is the exact problem I described earlier. Operating a grid isn't about generating the power -- it's about matching supply to demand in real time. Wind and solar are variable sources largely outside our control, which is why in large quantities, they destabilize a grid.

The media will spin this incessantly, just as they did the cause of the 2021 Texas ERCOT blackout -- but the facts remain. This isn't a problem that affects grids powered by demand sources like nuclear, hydro, and fossil fuels.

The problem, ironically, was solar. But it wasn't about grid power generation. It was because solar has been producing cheap energy, making Nuclear plants far less cost effective to run (from the article), so the expected back up wasn't there when the power dipped. Also, prior to the event, as there was an energy surplus, REE was offloading to other countries, and they had filled the hydro basins to the limit - so when the spike happened, there was no way to discharge via pumped storage. France shutting down their import connection played a role in creating the fluctuating Spanish load.
Yes, Spain -- like Germany -- is able to operate a grid near 50% non-demand sources (wind and solar) only by offloading excess power to its less-connected neighbors, then buying back power when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. A nice trick -- but one that works only when your neighbors are much less 'green' than you are. When they are, a single-country blackout can affect an entire continent. This one took out Spain and Portugal -- had France not disconnected early, it might have gone down as well too.

But I'll repeat my previous posts last point. There isn't any reason why home solar can't be integrated with battery storage for domestic use (off grid). Baseline grid access would still be likely for most, but home solar isn't the white elephant it used to be. It's not a miracle, but it offers something.
I agree wholeheartedly. My earlier points on home solar, though, were simply to reinforce the fact that "home solar" is either integrated with the grid (thereby requiring your neighbors to bear a large part of the cost of your system) or else requires substantial battery storage, which dramatically increases its cost.
 
My rebuttal to your point was simply that you said, "The grid failed not because it was "poorly managed" -- it generated too much solar, period."

The article does not say that; it literally says this:

This unusual situation points to a perfect storm of poor grid management and inadequate connections of solar facilities to the grid, as well as other unknown faults. In my opinion, there is a good chance that the computer programmes in charge of managing these systems played an important role, as they may not have been suitably prepared for these kinds of situations.

Although the grid is divided into different zones that can be isolated from one another, all zones were affected when thousands of small solar facilities scattered throughout the grid were disconnected at once. In addition, the interconnection of mainland Spain with the European grid is weak, and a stronger connection to the stable French grid would facilitate the synchronisation of the Spanish grid.

Solar energy during the sunniest hours distorts all offers (at price or negative), making more stable sources economically unviable unless they have a guaranteed price, and discouraging their production. The question is therefore not one of renewables versus nuclear, but rather how much solar power can be in the grid at any given moment while also maintaining stability.

A more worrying root cause is the involvement of politics in REE, as its presidency is typically held by former ministers or high-ranking politicians. Its current president is Beatriz Corredor, a lawyer and a former housing minister, and REE is pursuing the somewhat politicised objective of “100% renewables”.

Within hours of the outage on 28 April, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez raised suspicions that the origin of the blackout came from “private operators”, and he accused those arguing that more nuclear input would help stabilise the grid of being ignorant. Spain’s current EU-endorsed energy roadmap includes phasing out all nuclear power stations between 2027 and 2035.

Two days after the blackout, Corredor made public statements for the first time saying that an incident like this would not be repeated, a difficult assertion to make when the causes are still unknown.

It is essential that decisions on energy issues, such as “100% renewables”, have independent technical support that analyses and informs the public with rigour and transparency. A rational analysis should not pit renewables against nuclear, and technical bodies such as REE should be run by people outside of political power structures, preferably with the appropriate technical training. The European Union should also have a coordinated energy policy, and a Europe-wide electricity grid designed to deal with outages or potential external aggression.

Everyone can read the source link and see the conclusions the author reached.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Now, for the sake of the thread, we can move on from Spain. And yes, that's me putting my moderator hat on.
 
Last edited:
It's a good idea, but nowadays utility companies will highly discourage you from doing it because they're also moving to solar panels and want to retain you as a customer.

Also if you want to do it you should do it yourself or call a good handyman that's also willing to do the permits, because every single solar installer is a scammer that underpanels (by design) and upcharges you ten times the price of the panels. The true cost for the hardware for a hybrid 12kW system with a 14kW battery backup and 12.5kW of panels is ~$15k or so, meanwhile these companies will charge you 40 grand for a 4kW grid-tie, and that's after the tax incentives. But don't worry, "it'll pay for itself" (in a century) and the company gives you a ten year warranty (they go out of business next year) and all it costs is the threat of home repossession if you default.
 
Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that hydroelectric power is a source more hated by environmentalists than nuclear and fossil fuels.
Uh, no. I don't buy that at all. Washington state, home to evergreen university and a near critical mass of hippies, is nearly 100% hydro powered.

Sure some talk of dam busting has occured but not until long after the last coal and nuclear plants in the state went offline. This statement is frankly absurd.

My rebuttal to your point was simply that you said, "The grid failed not because it was "poorly managed" -- it generated too much solar, period."

The article does not say that; it literally says this:

This unusual situation points to a perfect storm of poor grid management and inadequate connections of solar facilities to the grid, as well as other unknown faults. In my opinion, there is a good chance that the computer programmes in charge of managing these systems played an important role, as they may not have been suitably prepared for these kinds of situations.

Although the grid is divided into different zones that can be isolated from one another, all zones were affected when thousands of small solar facilities scattered throughout the grid were disconnected at once. In addition, the interconnection of mainland Spain with the European grid is weak, and a stronger connection to the stable French grid would facilitate the synchronisation of the Spanish grid.

Solar energy during the sunniest hours distorts all offers (at price or negative), making more stable sources economically unviable unless they have a guaranteed price, and discouraging their production. The question is therefore not one of renewables versus nuclear, but rather how much solar power can be in the grid at any given moment while also maintaining stability.

A more worrying root cause is the involvement of politics in REE, as its presidency is typically held by former ministers or high-ranking politicians. Its current president is Beatriz Corredor, a lawyer and a former housing minister, and REE is pursuing the somewhat politicised objective of “100% renewables”.

Within hours of the outage on 28 April, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez raised suspicions that the origin of the blackout came from “private operators”, and he accused those arguing that more nuclear input would help stabilise the grid of being ignorant. Spain’s current EU-endorsed energy roadmap includes phasing out all nuclear power stations between 2027 and 2035.

Two days after the blackout, Corredor made public statements for the first time saying that an incident like this would not be repeated, a difficult assertion to make when the causes are still unknown.

It is essential that decisions on energy issues, such as “100% renewables”, have independent technical support that analyses and informs the public with rigour and transparency. A rational analysis should not pit renewables against nuclear, and technical bodies such as REE should be run by people outside of political power structures, preferably with the appropriate technical training. The European Union should also have a coordinated energy policy, and a Europe-wide electricity grid designed to deal with outages or potential external aggression.

Everyone can read the source link and see the conclusions the author reached.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Now, for the sake of the thread, we can move on from Spain. And yes, that's me putting my moderator hat on.
Not only that but there is this cool technology you can use to cut off plants in case of an energy excess, and the grid is laden with them: the humble switch.

Only saying it because that's applicable beyond just spain.
 
Last edited:
I agree wholeheartedly. My earlier points on home solar, though, were simply to reinforce the fact that "home solar" is either integrated with the grid (thereby requiring your neighbors to bear a large part of the cost of your system) or else requires substantial battery storage, which dramatically increases its cost.
This never made sense to me. How does somebody installing solar onto their home actually increase the costs for everybody else? And I'd rather an off-grid battery system than an underpaneled home that's forced to feed back into the system for "credits" on your utilities. You're forced to pay a minimum if you're connected to the grid regardless, so might as well get a system that's actually worth the install.

Uh, no. I don't buy that at all. Washington state, home to evergreen university and a near critical mass of hippies, is nearly 100% hydro powered.
He's being hyperbolic, but hydro definitely does have an environmental impact. Nuclear remains the cleanest energy source, if only red tape stopped holding it back...
 
He's being hyperbolic, but hydro definitely does have an environmental impact. Nuclear remains the cleanest energy source, if only red tape stopped holding it back...
I agree completely just not with the "public perception" of the impact. Hydro approaches green energy in public perception, though obviously no energy source is 100% green.

Nuclear for contrast has a poor public image but perhaps the best actual potential.
 
This never made sense to me. How does somebody installing solar onto their home actually increase the costs for everybody else?
If your home uses no grid power and doesn't sell power back to the grid, then it doesn't. If you sell your excess power, though, you're costing the utility money: a cost which ultimately is borne by others. And even if you don't, maintaining a grid connection for extremely light intermittent use carries a certain cost. Nearly all utilities don't charge line maintenance fees; they subsume that into the kW-hr rate, on the assumption the average household uses more than enough electricity to support those costs. (though to be fair, this second factor is nearly trivial).

Interestingly enough, my local natural gas utility is smarter: it charges customers $50/month (or more for commercial customers) for no usage whatsoever, simply to maintain the pipe to your home.

This statement is frankly absurd.
You're far out of touch with reality. Every single major environmental group from Greenpeace to the Sierra Club opposes the installation of new dams or hydroelectric power. And According to the environmental group 'American Rivers', which aims to "restore free-flowing rivers' across the entire USA, more than 1,500 dams were removed in the United States in the last 50 years, with 109 removed in just the year 2018 alone. This group is aiming to remove 30,000 more dams in the US by the year 2050.





 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top