Comments on: 'Black Silicon' Could Revolutionize Solar Cell Technology

By: Sam - Landing pages

Sam - Landing pages — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:39:31 +0000

This is a great breakthrough. Solar energy’s potential is still undertapped in countries like US. We need to work on improving the devices to increase efficiency.

By: Sam - Landing pages

Sam - Landing pages — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:39:00 +0000

This is a great breakthrough. Solar energy’s potential is still undertapped in countries like US. We need to work on improving the devices to increase efficiency.

By: Tito

Tito — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:54:12 +0000

This technology has been out for 10 years. The university purposly hid it so they could start a company. and do you really think it would be cheaper than the current silicon based photovoltaic systems? the truth is greed will consume all. there was nobody out there that truly has the good of the greater human kind at heart except for the world famous Nikola Tesla. He cared nothing for money, he only wanted what was best for humans all around. Too bad we dont have a modern day Tesla.

By: Tito

Tito — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:54:00 +0000

By: Darian

Darian — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:27:22 +0000

100 to 500 times increase in light sensitivity doesn’t translate into the same factor of efficiency increase in solar cells. You can only dislodge so many electrons out of the silicon lattice. The bandgap stays the same. The improvement comes from the double electrons coming from the Sulpur dopant, and from Sulphur’s sensitivity to the red and Infrared side of the spectrum, which Silion doesn’t have. But if you CAN double the usual 20-25% crystalline Silicon conversion efficiency with this technology, you’re taking a step closer to cost parity with conventional.

To the granola crunchers, don’t forget that Arco Solar and BP, both “BIG ENERGY” companies, did more to improve solar conversion efficiencies, and with less money, than most of DOE’s R&D efforts.

By: Darian

Darian — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:27:00 +0000

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:22:09 +0000

This material was discovered 10 years ago, that doesn’t qualify as “recent” to me. What was recent, was the licencing of the technology for commercial use.

Also, “same amount of energy as the sun falling on the entire surface of the Earth” is 35 times greater than the most powerful laser on earth. So if this were true, you picked the wrong story.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:22:00 +0000

This material was discovered 10 years ago, that doesn’t qualify as “recent” to me. What was recent, was the licencing of the technology for commercial use.

Also, “same amount of energy as the sun falling on the entire surface of the Earth” is 35 times greater than the most powerful laser on earth. So if this were true, you picked the wrong story.

By: Matt G.

Matt G. — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:31:27 +0000

I can see that it can absorb large amount of light, but how much electricity can it actually produce?

By: Matt G.

Matt G. — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:31:00 +0000

I can see that it can absorb large amount of light, but how much electricity can it actually produce?