Historically, I have spent a fair amount of time deriding Nanosolar for claiming that they would build a 430 MW/year solar cell factory by the end of 2007.

On the one hand, they have only 10 days to prove me wrong. I don’t think they will have ramped production up to 430 MW/year. On the other hand, they are shipping a thin film module created through a printing process. That alone is an impressive feat. They win the prize, soaring above the Aonian Mount, while pursuing things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme (well, maybe attempted in rhyme).

Nanosolar is claiming module costs of 1 $/W; the US solar industry is now selling around 5 $/W.

It looks like they have beaten:

• Ascent Solar (thin film, CIGS, probaby through vacuum deposition)
• Konarka (thin film, printed, organic cells)
• Heliovolt (thin film, printed, CIGS cells)
• SoloPower (thin film, CIGS, but electroplated, not printed)
• Miasole (thin film, CIGS, but not printed)
• Solyndra (thin-film CIGS, unknown process, but they’re hiring people with semiconductor process experience)

But have they hit grid parity? Maybe.

First off, $/W is a dumb metric. The W refers to the peak power, so if you buy a panel that peaks at 200 W for $800, you’re paying $4/W. It’s stupid, but it’s easy to measure, and it’s easy for journalists to quote.

A better metric is $/kWh, where kWh is a unit of energy. That’s harder to talk about, because you have to talk about average production over the course of a year, which changes with location, weather, age of the panel, and so on.

The sun that hits the ground peaks around 1000 W/m^2; you might get 20% of that on average, once you factor in night, clouds, and the like.

There are about 10,000 hours in a year, so I’d expect 200 W * 10,000 hours * 10% efficiency = 200 kWh/year for a square meter. In Massachusetts, where I live, that’s worth about $40 ($0.20 per kWh). (Did I get those calculations right?)

Conventional panels of around 10% efficiency are about $1500/m^2 (say, 2 Evergreen 200 W panels for $750 each?). Given panel life of about 20 years and the added expense of installation, an inverter, and maintenance, I think solar is still off from grid parity by a factor of 2-4 in Massachusetts (not counting Nanosolar).

If Nanosolar is telling the truth, they may have just hit grid parity.

Like a lot of semi-urban computer enthusiasts who plan on living for a few decades after the onset of global warming, I have a few computers that are always on, and I wish that I could find an economically viable way of reducing the emissions generated as a side effect of the power they require. Also, when the hard times come and grid power gets flaky or drops out entirely, it would make the local warlord happy if I could use a computer to calculate optimal irrigation ditch depths, or the like. (Note to self: learn to use abacus while leisure time still exists.)

Typically, solar arrays in urban or suburban areas are tied by an inverter to the local power grid. Such inverters cost a few thousand dollars; they both allow excess power to be released to other consumers and enable the use of AC appliances without any modifications. I live in a rented property, so installing a large solar array on the roof with an inverter in the basement is not an option. But, maybe I could run a smaller array without an inverter for DC loads only.

DC vs. AC
Computers, generally designed to connect to AC power, have as their first component a switching power supply that turns AC from the wall into DC. If I had a solar array, it would output DC, which would be converted to AC by the inverter, and then back to DC by each computer’s power supply, losing energy at each step. I call this “dumb”– why not just run the computers off of the DC directly?

The problem is that if you run the computers just off DC from the solar panel, the computers die when the sun is occluded by a cloud or a planet (at night, for example).

An alternative architecture
The system I’m building has a 24 V DC power supply fed from the grid at its core. This will run in parallel with whatever solar panel I eventually set up. For starters, I have replaced the ATX power supply that came with my desktop with a DC/DC converter from Ituner.com. I then power that from a beautiful DIN-mount Sola SDN 10-24-100P supply that I got off Ebay for $33.00 ($45.82 with shipping).

For the DC/DC converter, I looked at the pico-PSU, but rejected it in favor of the slightly larger M2-ATX-HV.

The M2-ATX-HV had a few advantages:

The M2-ATX-HV is a bit bigger, but my PC case is pretty large, so that wasn’t a concern. Including all the cables and shipping, I paid $96.40 for the M2-ATX-HV– about $30 for the advantages listed above.

Stage 1 complete
The DC system has been working reasonably well for a few weeks now. Next, I have to find a cheap way to test current sharing with a solar panel, as I don’t want to commit the full $700 or whatever for a 180 W panel until I have more evidence that it will work. I’m off to the beach to start collecting sand for a little homebrewed Czochralski action.