SOCIAL: nanosolar

[Eric Arons]

More info:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/nanosolar-begins-production-413.html

It's exciting, but we'll see how it plays out.

On Dec 21, 2007 11:30 AM, Randall Isaac <randall at deadletter.com> wrote:

> That's great.  My email was not intended to slam NanoSolar or what they
> are doing.  It was just to point out that if they make a PR claim like
> $1/watt and they want anyone to take them seriously, then they have to
> back it up.  They need to come out and say "Here is a solar panel we
> make, these are its specs, and this is its cost."   And until they are
> willing to do that, the mainstream media is quite right in ignoring the
> claim.  Since their website says the first 12 months of production is
> already sold, they may not care how much coverage they get.
>
> Randall
>
> brian kusler wrote:
> > i got to hang out at nanosolar a couple of months ago while my
> > brother was down here (he's an electron microscope engineer)...
> > what's so different about nanosolar is that they just went the
> > opposite direction of all the other solar companies -- rather than
> > trying to wring more energy out of a square meter of roof space by
> > boosting the efficiency, they focused on mass production techniques
> > and dollars per watt.
> >
> > the other thing that's really cool about their stuff is that their
> > panels have a one month energy payback time. with traditional solar
> > panels, it takes about 3 years for them to produce the energy used to
> > create them. it's another major environmental win. since all most
> > people care about is DOLLAR payback time, it should halve that time
> > (to appx 3 years).
> >
> > when we put panels onto our roof, our HOA was very concerned that we
> > not take up more than "our share" of the roof space with our panels,
> > in case other units in our building wanted panels of their own. using
> > normal Sharp panels, we just barely fit. if nanosolar's were
> > significantly less efficient than the 14% rating of the Sharp, we
> > wouldn't have had room it.
> >
> > : b
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Social mailing list
> > Social at lists.deeptrouble.com
> > http://lists.deeptrouble.com/listinfo.cgi/social-deeptrouble.com
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Social mailing list
> Social at lists.deeptrouble.com
> http://lists.deeptrouble.com/listinfo.cgi/social-deeptrouble.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deeptrouble.com/pipermail/social-deeptrouble.com/attachments/20071221/1ad843b1/attachment-0001.htm>