Flexible Solar Powered Rooftop Shingles
Researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in Richland have developed flexible solar panels that could be installed on roofs like shingles. This technology was originally used to protect flat panel televisions from dampness. They used to cover television screen with transparent, thin films that acted as barriers. These transparent thin film barriers are now becoming the basis for flexible solar panels that would be installed on roofs like shingles. These flexible rooftop solar panels are known as building-integrated photovoltaics, or BIPVs. They could replace today’s boxy solar panels. We all know that current solar panels are made with rigid glass or silicon and mounted on thick metal frames. If we compare present solar panels and flexible solar shingles we will find the later ones less expensive to install than current panels and made to last 25 years.
This technology was developed by PNNL in 1990s. They consider utilizing this technology in fifteen possible ways. One of it was solar power. But when Vitex Systems licensed the technology from Battelle, it refocused its goals. They saw potential and commercial success in developing ultra-barrier films for flat-panel displays, such as televisions. Now Vitex and PNNL, which is operated by Battelle for the Department of Energy, are reorienting the use of ultra-barrier films. The time might be right for them to exploit the current alternative energy scenario. Mark Gross, a PNNL senior scientist, explains “There’s a lot of wasted space on rooftops that could actually be used to generate power. Flexible solar panels could easily become integrated into the architecture of commercial buildings and homes. Solar panels have had limited success because they’ve been difficult and expensive to install.”
The encapsulation process and the ultra-barrier film – called Barix™ Encapsulation and Barix™ Barrier Film, correspondingly – are already established and efficient moisture barriers. Now researchers are trying to find out a technology that could be successfully implemented to solar panels. The research work will be undertaken by Vitex and Battelle. It will be done under a cooperative research and development agreement recently signed by Vitex and Battelle. Battelle is the majority shareholder of Vitex, based in San Jose, California. Currently researchers are engaged in creating low-cost flexible barrier films and they are evaluating substrate materials for solar panels that can survive sunshine, rain and hail for decades. They will also work out the details of manufacturing process for large-scale production.
PNNL’s research will be funded by DOE’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Technology Commercialization Fund. The estimated cost of the project willbe $350,000 . A commercial match to the funding is required, and Vitex will provide up to $350,900 in labor, equipment and materials. If this project is completed successfully, this progression will decrease solar panel manufacturing costs to less than $1 per watt of power, which would be competitive with the 10 cents per kilowatt-hour that a utility would charge.
“Vitex is proud to continue its long, successful relationship with PNNL,” said Martin Rosenblum, Vitex’s vice president of operations and engineering. “Vitex is excited to further its Barix™ technology’s proven barrier performance for photovoltaics toward mass manufacturing. Together, we look forward to creating a product that will help alleviate America’s dependence on foreign oil and increase America’s access to an abundant renewable energy source – the sun.”
Related posts:
Interested in writing news articles about alternative energy? Contact Us
June 14th, 2009
So the question is… is it like the old ones? cause you could not walk on those, they would get damaged… cool though.
June 14th, 2009
Been hearing about this, I look forward to applications like this catching on, it’s about time…
June 14th, 2009
This is brilliant and should be standard for all new houses.
June 14th, 2009
See I say again, why aren’t wind turbines covered in solar panels? they could easily be producing double if not triple the power and consistently too, not just when its windy.
June 14th, 2009
Flexible solar panels shingles this I really like. Nice point of view Charles on wind turbines and solar panels a concept need doing.
June 15th, 2009
Why do we need flexible shingles? Is this just another product in search of a market? How many roofs change their shape constantly as to require flexible shingles?
The fact is, these flexible laminates need to have high enough efficiencies and low enough cost of manufacturing, in addition to long life. DOE has funded many projects that have attempted to do that. So far, all have failed miserably.
Bringing solar panel manufacturing costs to less than $1 per watt may not be enough, if the panel-level efficiency is less than 5%, as the balance-of-system costs could still be prohibitively high. In addition the long-term degradation could still be too high, and the life of the panels may be less than 20 years.
June 17th, 2009
I think you will find that this idea is already in production. I think the idea comes from a company called nanosolar.
June 17th, 2009
This is still the holy grail search for aesthetics that meets the efficiency required to justify. If we aren’t so anal about appearance and realized that simple is better, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I totally agree with research to expand our future options but the mindset of many is similar to the analogy that when cars reach 100mpg AND cost less that $20K, then I’ll do it. Not very wise thinking. We need to remember that the market still drives innovation but holding of on progress when we are in the economic and technological void of today is not wise. Support innovation by moving forward in small steps if neccessary. JMHO
June 17th, 2009
To Paul: Nanosolar is producing vaporware, apparently. There are many companies that produce (or claim to produce in the future) flexible solar cells (Unisolar, Xunlight, Flexcell, Konarka, Powerfilm, Ascent Solar, Global Solar, and probably a few others). But each one of those product has problems – it is either the cost of manufacturing, the usable life of the product, the efficiency, etc, etc. Thus, my question: why do we need flexible shingles? How many roofs change their shapes all the time to such an extent to require flexibility? If you want shingles on a curved roof, no problem – current crystalline technology can do that using properly designed shingles, clamps or racks.
To RB: Research is good. Mindless hyping of a vaporware product with uncertain potential is not.
June 19th, 2009
I think flexible solar is a good idea, especially in the area of Texas where I live where damaging hail is a potential problem as well as extreme winds. The way I see it, being able to flex would be very beneficial. But, that’s just my 2 cents.
June 19th, 2009
Steve:
Every certified glass PV panel is designed to withstand the impact of a one-inch hail ball at 52 mph, wind pressure of 50 lbs per sq ft, and wind speeds up to 120-130 mph. Now, in Texas, the flexible things will probably heat up the roof (as they are glued to the roof without ventilation) – up to 20% of the generated electrical energy could be wasted on increased HVAC costs. You don’t have that problem with tilted glass panels, which cast shadows and improve the air circulation, thus, actually cool down the roof!
June 20th, 2009
I think I have seen this installed one of those Green show a few months back. Its a great concept. I forget what the show was called. Anyone remember?
June 22nd, 2009
ECD Fan – like your points – keep talking sense while most are just talking!
At present both PV and wind have a lot of hot air moving around trying to catch suckers for both sales and investment. Both can be good done right but PV panels on turbine towers and on cars is silliness looking for a place to happen.
Be interesting if people would pay more attention to what works now – like residential solar water heaters.
October 30th, 2009
Paul Barnes notes that Nanosolar (A Google backed California Company) started this off. They did not actually invent the process, but they did take it and run with the idea. Their production costs are less than $1 per watt, making the electricity price-competitive with that of the grid. Which, as we all know, only goes up. And as for balance of system costs, that depends somewhat on whether or not you have a stand alone system, or purely grid tied, in which case your power might go out when the grid goes down. If you do indeed have battery backup, inverter etc., then, yes your costs are higher, but not prohibitive. Any half decent DIY person can keep the installation costs down to almost nothing.
Personally, I like the idea that my power NEVER fails me.
October 30th, 2009
Keith: Nanosolar are not running with anything. They have stalled. They are making just 1MW a month, (and none of it is the flexible stuff), while First Solar is making about 100MW a month now. If Nanosolar’s production costs were less than $1 a Watt, they would have been making 100MW a month as well, but they aren’t.
If you claim that PV power never fails you, can you tell us how many kWhs does your system generate each night?
As far as utility electricity price always going up, there were a lot of people two years ago who thought that housing prices never fall nationwide. But Japan proved that electricity rates can consistently fall for 20 years in a row ( see here http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/japan.html for the the 20-year drop), especially after a burst of an asset bubble. I understand that you need to justify to yourself the uninformed decision you made, but why are you attempting to lure other people as well?
October 30th, 2009
ecdfan:
Thank you for the information. I readily admit I was unaware that Nanosolar was “stalled” as you put it. However, the latest corporate report that I read did not indicate this. In fact, the actual production costs were touted as being well down into the 30 cent range. And 1 MW a month is hardly stalled. How much does your company produce each month? You mention Japan with declining power prices. If I inadvertently failed to mention that I was speaking of the US, which should have been obvious, I apologize.
Utility prices have nothing whatsoever to do with falling house prices. Could you point me to maybe a dozen examples where US power prices fell as much as the 30% of many houses? And like it or not, my solar power system has never failed me. There is no way that your grid power can make that claim. Please take a moment to explain what you mean by justifying myself “the uninformed decision I made, and attempting to lure other people?” What uninformed decision did I make, and who am I trying to “lure”, as you put it.
November 2nd, 2009
Keith: If Nanosolar’s costs were in the 30c per Watt range (for their 11%-efficient modules), they would been making 500MW a month (5x that of what First Solar makes, which has the misfortune of making the same 11%-efficient modules at 90c per Watt), not the ridiculous 1MW. Because 30c cost of manufacturing would allow a PV maker to sell a module at 60c per Watt, ex works, and if the module could survive for at least 10 years, it means that these things will be at grid parity without any incentives. But they aren’t. Nanosolar’s cost of manufacturing are nowhere near 30c per Watt. And given the history of Nanosolar hype, they probably can’t even get to $1 per Watt.
In the US, average residential retail electricity prices decreased 1.5 percent year-over-year in July (from 12.14 cents per kWh in July 2008 to 11.96 cents per kWh in July 2009). So it is just Japan.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html
How do you explain that inconvenient truth?
You solar system fails you every night – you system generates 0 kwh at night! But the grid supplies clean power each night and illuminates the streets.
So the fact that you overpaid for your unreliable electricity source does not give you the right to spread misinformation and lure other victims in making a long-term “investment” they do not understand fully. PV solar is one of the most expensive sources of electrical energy. And it is a long-term investment subject to various risks.
November 2nd, 2009
ECD Fan:
Do you have a name, & maybe a gravatar? If anyone is spreading misinformation, it is you. What has the cost of anything got to do with the amount of production? Where did you come up with that? And just because something costs 30 cents to produce does not necessarily mean it can be retailed at 60 cents.
If I understand Nanosolar correctly, their efficiency is touted to be higher than 11%. What gives you cause to say something insulting like “given the history of Nanosolar hype” etc.
Could you explain how it is that Nanosolar has already paid a dividend on its’ shares?
How very clever of you to pick out one figure where the cost of electricity appears to have declined. But why did you not say that the INCREASE this year was 3.5%? And while you are at it, explain why the drop in fuel prices to the power companies decreased so much and yet the apparent decrease in electric costs was so puny? Can you explain also please, why it is that the fossil fuel lobby gets a $70 billion annual “fix” from the feds, while renewables claim only $1 billion of the pie? You don’t suppose that has anything to do with the artificially low cost of grid power, do you?
Once again ECD, I must point out that my solar system does not fail me every night, as you so incorrectly put it. Read the word “system” OK. Try and get that part through your head. My “system” works perfectly, thank you, regardless of what you might think. Since you seem to be incredibly well informed as to my solar costs, why don’t you tell me how much my system cost?
As for PV solar being one of the most expensive sources of electrical energy, what are you comparing the cost to? Are you not aware that solar electricity is being produced on a large scale in Nevada for 7 1/2 cents/kwh? Is that so terribly high?
“And it is a long-term investment subject to various risks.” That might be a fair statement, but that also applies to ANY other investment you may make.
Please be more specific, what “risks” are you speaking of? What about the risk of the US losing its’ international oil supply? What about the risk of all this lovely carbon dioxide being dumped into our atmosphere? Or doesn’t any of that bother you.
Earlier this year I took several days to check and see what real people were paying for their electricity (I did this on a DIY website) and most seemed to be paying around 17 cents/kwh for their highly subsidized power. Perhaps there are two levels of retail, I don’t know. Plus there are different prices depending on the time of use during the day. Personally, I advocate the use of any form of renewable energy, no matter what it is. I wonder what your great, great grandchildren will think of your attitude 100 years from now. Let’s hope that they will still have a habitable planet to call home.
ECD, please understand that I am not trying to be insulting in any way here, not in the least. But, at some point, we all must accept the fact that this insane use of fossil fuel electricity cannot continue. When I say “all” I mean you AND me. Our family makes a conscience effort to keep our energy consumption to a minimum. It is education toward conserving energy which will have the greatest benefit to everyone.
Surely, I hope you agree with me there.
February 6th, 2010
ECD.Fan –
I was a poster on your blogspot.com and we had some decent discussions. I am disappointed to see you have closed your blogspot to a limited reader base, since I was a contributor to your blog I deserve access… Todor Mitev has also been linked/leaked to be ECD.Fan or close contact with him. Considering Todor is advises investors on these subjects, it’s shady and slanted information at best from him. It’s 98% truth + 2% slant to make his views seem legit to push his investors agenda.
–
About ECD.Fan (he clearly has $$ in the big silicon panel industry). He generally will always slant against thin-film PV, though his knowledge is a bit limited in this respect (take it from a materials scientist who now designs hundreds of complete crystalline Silicon PV systems for the US largest PV distributor)… I’ve worked in the thin-film labs and design both thin-PV and panel PV systems all over the US.
When he talks about low efficiency shingles, he’s referring to Uni-Solar’s poor implementation of PV shingles that was discontinued years ago (5% efficiency).
He’s not (or shouldn’t be) referring to the flexible CIGS shingles that Global Solar / DOW make at 10-11% efficiency… nearly double the power density. They have also solved key wiring / grounding issues and moisture barrier polymer issues which make CIGS PV a long-term stable solution.
And you know what ECD.Fan, to have a roof without tens to hundreds of penetrations, expensive & heavy PV racking / rail systems, etc… I’ll deal with putting a good reflective thermal barrier down under the shingles to keep the roof cool, get PV for a much reduced install cost, with a new shingle roof!! These (nail gun installable) DOW / Global Solar Powerhouse shingles are excellent. Even come in a Spanish tile format. Hmm, does he really think our nations best energy scientist lack vision?
Don’t get me wrong, ECD. Fan being an investor is well read and most people who post here aren’t PV industry versed enough to argue all the nonstop posting this guy does on like 40 sites. He is always trying to “short” any PV innovators / companies that aren’t his silicon PV buddies.
So he spreads slanted information. He’s NOT an engineer, so while he’s reasonably intelligent, he just spouts crap off. This is coming from a PV systems engineer who designs / sells / performs real ROI and energy yield analysis on far more of his c-Si PV & thin-PV than he has ever seen. I guarantee you, he works of 3rd party info, no real investigation done on his part.
ECD.Fan, I’d love to be able to read (and debunk) your blogspot some more (or shall I call you Todor Mitev or one of his buddies)?
http://ecdfan.blogspot.com/
February 7th, 2010
Dear “John Foreman:”
I don’t remember anybody named John Foreman commenting on my blog or having any discussions with me. But, since you are so eager to start posting, you are welcome to obtain a court order and get your access.
A google search for “Todor Mitev” reveals about 6,050 hits, apparently of various individuals under that name across the world. Can you tell us more details about who that person is and about that person’s precise relationship to me (and the source of your link/leakage, and whatever evidence you might have that the person in question advises investors on “these subjects”)? Also, any evidence of slanted and shady information coming from me will be greatly appreciated.
What? You lost a lot of money in some “solar” stock and now you are looking for somebody to blame? Is that it?
And, really, my knowledge of thin-film is limited? Care to provide examples to show that? Any example? I thought so.
The so-called “poor implementation” of the shingles by Uni-Solar won Popular Science’s 1996 “Best of What’s New” Grand Award:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-18852140.html
The shingles were commercialized (SHR-17), but are no longer UL-certified and were taken off the market. But, how would you know that? You seem to be simply an uninformed “materials scientist” who does not know what he is talking about.
The so-called Global Solar/Dow shingles are not a commercial product (if they were, where can we buy them?). Their fate, if they ever get commercialized, is quite uncertain, particularly given that 15%-efficient quality Chinese crystalline modules are now quoted below $1.90 per Watt. The Dow shingles’ efficiency will be really known only if Dow ever start volume production and publish a datasheet. And the ability to survive rain won’t be known until at least a year in the field. By the way, who is our nation’s “best energy scientist?”
Yup, I use publicly-available information (only) to form and support my claims. You, however, apparently prefer speculations and fairy tales.
Now, if you are indeed Mr. Foreman of DC Power, can you confirm that your company has just 511 KWs worth of installations under the CSI program, of which just 54KW are with Unisolar products? If that’s the case, DC Power is basically an insignificant player in its home state (less than 1% share of the 585MW non-canceled reservations so far under the CSI) and an insignificant Unisolar customer (as 54KW is less than 0.05% of Unisolar’s shipments over the past two years). And you call yourself and “a PV systems engineer who designs / sells / performs real ROI and energy yield analysis.” Pitiful.
Oh, yes, of those 511KW, 342KW are apparently done with Sharp. So, does DC Power have “$$ in the big silicon panel industry?”