703
consider the implications for a post scarcity future (slrpnk.net)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
104 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/8471507

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 years ago (10 children)

Solar panels degrade over time, I don't know what the numbers are but they used to be dysmal, like 30% reduction in generation capacity over 5 years. Whatever the actual numbers are, we will constantly be replacing panels. I am sure we can figure out refurbishing too at some point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Yeah they're definitely better now, I'm reading anywhere between 1% per year or 12.5% at year 25. There are other things that can pop up though, micro cracks causing localized overheating of the panel - to backing failures and other physical issues. I'm interested in standing some up at some point but the capital eludes me at the moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I'm am certainly wrong, that figure was something my dad told me as a kid, we were on solar back then.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    No worries at all. Like you said though, with advancements people will likely do upgrades over time anyways. I don't have numbers off the top of my head, but even just the per panel efficiencies have grown fantastically since your last experience.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (5 children)

    but they used to be dysmal, like 30% reduction in generation capacity over 5 years.

    ??? Monocrystalline silicon losses less than .4% a year. That means after 50 years it's still producing 82% of when it was new. It takes 90 years to get a 30% reduction rate.

    https://www.engineering.com/story/what-is-the-lifespan-of-a-solar-panel

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Do you know the type of pv panel that was used 20+ years ago? I lived in an off grid house and my dad mentioned that at one point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Monocrystalline silicon was used 20 years ago. It's the oldest solar technology.

    According to the source data in a link in the page I linked thin film CIGS rollable solar sheets was the least durable. Panels installed before 2000 had a degradation of 3.5% a year. That's 10 years to lose 30%. But CIGS solar systems installed after the year 2000 show only .02% degradation a year. The document talks about manufacturing defects that were corrected.

    http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51664.pdf

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah but your point is that solar panels degrade 30% after 5 years, and then you reframe the context for 20 years ago?

    Go astrosurf somewhere else.

    Any grid has a maintenance cost and degradation. Solar panels isn't any different.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •