Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!sri-unix!Hank.Walker@CMU-CS-VLSI.ARPA
From: Hank.Walker@CMU-CS-VLSI.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: solar cells
Message-ID: <193@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Apr-84 13:17:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.193
Posted: Thu Apr 26 13:17:00 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 13-May-84 00:26:46 EDT
Lines: 17

According to a March Spectrum article, RCA achieved 10.1% efficient
amorphous cells in 1982.  This technology was licensed to Solarex.
Fuji, Sanyo, and Sharp have plants, the latter in a joint venture with
Energy Conversion Devices of Troy, Michigan.  Sharp is using it to
build solar-powered calculators.  The cost is about $7 per peak watt,
about the same as solar modules (cells in assemblies) made with
commercially-available single-crystal cells.

Low price per peak watt for the cell isn't the goal, it's low price per
kilowatt hour.  This takes into account balance-of-plant costs such as
power conditioners, and as an example, for a typical plant, 12.6% cells
could cost $400M, 10% cells could cost $320M, and 5% cells would have
to cost -30M for the same busbar power cost.  So efficiency does matter
for power plants.  This example comes from Southern California Edison,
the utility with more solar experience than anyone.

So NASA's goals aren't all that different than those of the real world.