Comment by h0l0cube
4 months ago
Yeah, I think the major problem with them is lifetime. Oxford PV's tandem panels are supposed to meet or exceed typical panel lifetimes, but being tandem, they also use silicon.
4 months ago
Yeah, I think the major problem with them is lifetime. Oxford PV's tandem panels are supposed to meet or exceed typical panel lifetimes, but being tandem, they also use silicon.
That would be another factor.
PV tech to date has a presumed lifespan of about 20 years, at which point it's both typically degraded to 80% of nameplate functionality and cheaper to replace with newer, more functional, components.
That said, extending life by a factor of 50--100% could be a game-changer, particularly where PV is a major (or majority) factor of electricity generation or all energy inputs. At that point, needing to replace 5% of all installed capacity every year becomes its own daunting task. Reducing that to 2.5% would be a tremendous win if that could be achieved at a competitive cost.
I've done some reading on both how and why panels fail and durability/lifespan testing (much of this comes out of NREL in the US), and as it's due to multiple degradation pathways achieving greater lifespans isn't a trivial task, and the 20-year benchmark is itself quite dependent on specific experiences. E.g., a heavy hailstorm won't much care how old your panels are, but on average the expected incidence of such events is factored into the 20-year life expectancy (along with other similarly variable factors).