[Guest redsolar]

Stop what? Replying to questions? Don't ask if you don't want answers or only one type of answer instead of the facts.

 

I don't see why you went back to talking about wafers when I talk about cells, since you seem to have a problem with talking wafer even though cells are based on wafers. P-type mono in JA's press release refers to the WAFER type they use in their PERCIUM cells.

 

From PR: "solar cells using p-type mono-Si wafers"

 

From PR: "JA Solar plans to introduce the new cell technology into mass production within the next six months and integrate the new high-efficiency cells into module assembly lines for commercial use."

 

Yingli has shipped panels with high efficiency n-type mono cells for years with continued efficiency improvements. That puts Yingli in leadership position on investing in and commercializing high efficiency cells. Cost is a different question. So JA only beats 9 out 10 CN11 peers on high efficency cells, what's the big problem with that?

 

I'm talking exactly about the subject. Please clarify your accusation that I'm not.

 

Stop what? Replying to questions? Don't ask if you don't want answers or only one type of answer instead of the facts.

 

I don't see why you went back to talking about wafers when I talk about cells, since you seem to have a problem with talking wafer even though cells are based on wafers. P-type mono in JA's press release refers to the WAFER type they use in their PERCIUM cells.

 

From PR: "solar cells using p-type mono-Si wafers"

 

From PR: "JA Solar plans to introduce the new cell technology into mass production within the next six months and integrate the new high-efficiency cells into module assembly lines for commercial use."

 

Yingli has shipped panels with high efficiency n-type mono cells for years with continued efficiency improvements. That puts Yingli in leadership position on investing in and commercializing high efficiency cells. Cost is a different question. So JA only beats 9 out 10 CN11 peers on high efficency cells, what's the big problem with that?

 

I'm talking exactly about the subject. Please clarify your accusation that I'm not.

Take it easy guys...we all are right in this regard. 

[odyd 1,340]

JASO looks like it is from another planet. 

[uchsteve 115]

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20130902PD215.html

 

[Guest iwcwatch]

Brothers,

 

May I have your opinion about Graphene investment value in Solar? If I want to invest Graphene solar, any good picks I can choose?

 

Thanks in advance.

Cheers

[explo 648]

Would that technology be applicable for mainstream or nisch PV markets? It would be interesting to see a property comparsion with today's mainstream silicon wafer based cells.

[Guest iwcwatch]

My view is from this article  

http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/graphene-solar-investing/3799

[Guest eysteinh]

My oppinion is that it is still far ahead in time for Graphene to be mainstream market. There are several reasons, one major one is that all solar panels have very long guarantees and they need tried and true solutions, the c-si we base ourself on now has been around for 40+ years and most of the "hi-tech" solutions was first implemented in satelites etc before finding its way to commercial production.  Graphene is unproven and when a study shows me a clear economic and efficency advantage with graphene over c-si I think is the time producers also would seriously start to consider this technology. A small advantage is not enough because of the long guarantees, it will simple not be worth it.

 

What we can see however is a graphene mesh over the c-si wafer to improve effiency. That should be implemented in the near future (1-3 years - if i remember correctly manz allready have a commercial solution, and I think a swedish laboratory also have) But again as with all other improvements it has to be cost effective for producers to consider it. I think this is how graphene slowly will work its way into solar panels. Perhaps 5-10 years from now more of the solar panel will be graphene if it is sucsessfull and proven cost effective. Keep in mind it is also competing with other new technologies. You have all the organic technologies and you have all the technologies that tries to throw out the saw out of the wafer equation - mostly by making the wafer straight from gas/melted silicon from a mold.

[odyd 1,340]

Welcome our new author, Deepak Kumar and his great article and discussion opener

https://solarpvinvestor.com/spvi-news/538-wacker-chemical-and-polysilicon-industry-review

[uchsteve 115]

Thanks Odyd.

[Guest eysteinh]

Good article! Some comments: - 6.0 gram per watt I feel is not current anymore. It really depends also on price of polysilicon as breakage ratio goes down the thicker they make the wafer, but of course if it cost more for the silicon then it will be more economical to cut the wafers thinner again.

 

-Fbr only had higher capex because REC built during the epitome of the boom cycle in the economy. If you look at FBR B they are looking at 50$/kg capex according to they're own presentation. I do agree it is not mainstream and perhaps will  have around 10-30% market share going forward. Also you may note that while FBR A has lower quality in some purities it has economical benefits in mono wafer production. Also you may note FBR B will have electronic grade and it is speculated already parts of REC first FBR plant has been upgraded to Electronic grade quality. (The pilot reactor delivers EG.)  

Apart from that I completely agree with the conclusion in the article and it is pretty much the same conclusions I have had in my own articles on the subject.

 

The readers might also be interested in the fact daqo managed a 14$/kg production cost according to the latest conference call. This is still theoretical as they are moving the equipment but if simens can stay around 2$/kg (average of fbr is in fact 12$/kg not 11$/kg due to maintenance having to be done every single year) then simens will stay competitive in China.