Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!
New Concentrated Solar Tech: Simple, Cheap and Efficient
cleantechnica.com — Morgan Solar, a Toronto-based company launched last summer, believes it has the answer to creating simple and cheap solar concentrators.
ecoHottie- 919 diggs
- digg it
- angeladtao, on 09/05/2008, -1/+23Wow! I want this all over my roof!! Now!!
- NicMorgan, on 09/05/2008, -0/+0They require trackers so they're more solar farm, and less roof oriented.
- S1ngular1ty1, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Me too !
- elephantwaylon, on 09/05/2008, -0/+17I just installed solar at my house--it just sits there and my bills hover near zero, love it.
- JRW5061, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6Thats great! How much did it cost to install? Just curious.
- cottoz, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6I looked into it... to supply all the power needed by your average home, without making serious conservation efforts, it would take about $90,000. Needless to say, the solar power industry NEEDS innovation.
- buckrogers1965, on 09/05/2008, -0/+2Yes, but maybe, just maybe we all need to make those serious conservation efforts even if we aren't switching to solar power?
- blackinthmiddle, on 09/05/2008, -2/+3I see you're in Colorado. I guess you're still attached to the grid because you're obviously not going to get any electricity when it snows. Could you describe your setup?
- DiggItalia, on 09/05/2008, -2/+6When I was a little kid I used to go in the backyard to kill ants with a magnifier glass... Who knew I could have turned my game, with the given adjustments, into a legitimate business? :-) Anyway, I'm always happy to hear about new cheap solutions to produce green energy, that's what we need.
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -0/+2Sweet! Someday I want a house with a roof covered with solar panels... that would be awesome not having to pay PG&E every month for electricity!! I hope this technology becomes efficient and affordable enough for everyone.
- rinpoche, on 09/05/2008, -1/+9A lot of poorer countries are already going solar. India is way ahead of the US in Solar power.
We love to make our oil barons rich.- th3heretic, on 09/05/2008, -0/+2Maybe you love to, but the rest of us don't have much of a choice...
- NotYourProdigy, on 09/05/2008, -9/+6Yes, but have they figured out how to make it last more than 10 years? These panels made of acrylic will eventually melt, especially closer to the equator, or high altitude.
Is anyone here old enough to remember the advances in solar tech that were made in the 70s? WTF happened? If we landed on the moon in the late 60s, then why can't we land on Mars by now, 40 years later? ***** 80s and 90s generations, they really dropped the ball.- GiJoeBob, on 09/05/2008, -2/+8Yeah, sorry about that whole defeating Communism thing.
- billbugger, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4And the popularity of the Internet
- megadan76, on 09/05/2008, -4/+1You won't be surprised when you get buried, seeing how basically everyone on the internet was born in the 80's and 90's.
- santaliqueur, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3If they were born in the 80s and 90s, then they have nothing to do with the success in those decades.
- Unzorn, on 09/05/2008, -1/+2Yes, because getting to Mars is exactly the same as going to the moon.
- NotYourProdigy, on 09/13/2008, -0/+1And the Apple II in 1977 is exactly the same as the 8 Core Standard Mac Pro of 2008.
Don't be naive when it comes to tech. progress, especially one(NASA) that has received hundreds of billions of dollars of government funds over the last 40 years. I have a brother who used to design fighter crafts in the 80s. He never told me much, but what he did makes me scared of what tech. they should have by now, using it for things we are not told. The public will not hear about a certain tech for at least 20 years after it was produced(for safety reasons)
- NotYourProdigy, on 09/13/2008, -0/+1And the Apple II in 1977 is exactly the same as the 8 Core Standard Mac Pro of 2008.
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -2/+2I seriously think the republicans are to blame... They hate clean energy and all our tax money is going to fund their religion war!! They don't give a ***** about the environment or the people as long as they're getting a fat paycheck.
- pathouston22, on 09/05/2008, -3/+5The solar market would be helped if the Democrat-controlled Congress would get off its ass and extend tax credits for solar panels. Right now they are set to expire at the end of the year. Lots of companies are holding back.
- roarkwebdesign, on 09/05/2008, -1/+1While that may be true, is it not sad that a product needs my tax dollars to be affordable? If we, as Americans, could get out of the entitlement mindset and move away from the Socialist trend line we have been following the last 50 years; we would be much better off for it.
Laissez-faire Capitalism is a better road to travel than having a nanny-State doling out tax credits for a product that is not mass-marketable yet.
Besides, mixing the words 'market' with 'tax credits' is bit odd. A free market should not have government interference; such as you are suggesting.- pathouston22, on 09/05/2008, -1/+1"is it not sad that a product needs my tax dollars to be affordable?"
No. Solar energy is still more expensive for the most part, with some recent breakthroughs have made it cheaper but are not mass-produced yet. - r00fus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Your comment be more meaningful if EVERY other power generation scheme didn't get subsidized also.
http://media.cleantech.com/node/554
- pathouston22, on 09/05/2008, -1/+1"is it not sad that a product needs my tax dollars to be affordable?"
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Them darn rascals!!!
- cottoz, on 09/05/2008, -0/+0It's still not affordable; even with the tax credits. The credits are supposed to "jump start" the industry, but the industry needs to do its part and INNOVATE to make ANY form of alternative energy affordable.
- pathouston22, on 09/05/2008, -0/+0The industry has been jump started, solar is taking off (I know because I read the financial reports of several solar companies). But it is not more cost effective than other sources of energy at the moment, but the tax credits help.
- pathat, on 09/10/2008, -0/+0Who's going to innovate without an incentive to do so? Innovation from an industry standpoint is profit-driven.
- rationalist, on 09/05/2008, -1/+4"Democratically-controlled Congress" is something of a misnomer.
The Democrats do not have the requisite 60 votes in the Senate to pass anything like this. Unlike the House, where a mere majority rules, in the Senate, nothing gets done without 60 votes for cloture.
Republicans have blocked effort after effort to make real change. If you want it to happen, help elect more progressive Senators. Even if the Dems do not quite reach 60 this cycle, the closer they get, the more likely they can move the (very, very) few remaining moderate Republicans to support these efforts.
- roarkwebdesign, on 09/05/2008, -1/+1While that may be true, is it not sad that a product needs my tax dollars to be affordable? If we, as Americans, could get out of the entitlement mindset and move away from the Socialist trend line we have been following the last 50 years; we would be much better off for it.
- BlueTunicLink, on 09/05/2008, -2/+1Anyone have a link to specifics on how it works?
- Timmmm, on 09/05/2008, -1/+2Sounds pretty simple. If you've ever had a piece of acrylic sheet or rod you must have noticed that the edges/ends can get really bright. The light gets totally internally reflected within the perspex sheet and propagates to the edges where the solar cells are. Pretty simple and clever.
Just to make it clear, 1m^2 of this isn't 750 times more efficient than 1m^2 of plain solar cells. Overall it will be less efficient but as it is the cost per watt that really matters not cost per area then this will work out cheaper.
- Timmmm, on 09/05/2008, -1/+2Sounds pretty simple. If you've ever had a piece of acrylic sheet or rod you must have noticed that the edges/ends can get really bright. The light gets totally internally reflected within the perspex sheet and propagates to the edges where the solar cells are. Pretty simple and clever.
- Pfkninenines, on 09/05/2008, -1/+2"Morgan Solar, a Toronto-based company launched last summer, believes it has the answer to creating simple and cheap solar concentrators.
While other companies are working to make solar cheaper by using mirrors or lenses to magnify sunlight that is directed into solar cells, Morgan Solar takes a different approach. Their system uses a thin sheet of acrylic to concentrate sunlight 750 times. The sunlight is directed to a tiny cell on the edge of the plastic, greatly reducing the amount of material needed.
Though Morgan Solar has competitors in the concentrated solar field, the company claims that their design is more efficient and less likely to break than other systems. And since their product requires so few materials—just aluminum, acrylic, and PV—it will be four times cheaper than other concentrated solar technologies.
Of course, Morgan Solar’s design is sure to draw comparisons to MIT’s announcement in July of a new technology that uses organic dyes to concentrate solar. But Morgan Solar claims that their optics are even more efficient.
We’ll find out whether the companies impressive claims are true in short order— a 1 meter by 1 meter prototype panel is currently being installed at the Earth Rangers Center in Toronto. The panel will begin producing electricity at the end of the month.
If Morgan Solar’s panels work as planned, concentrated solar may become a viable technology for countries that can’t afford the expensive systems available today."
Full article, minus one picture.
Hope this is as effective as it says it is, and it becomes readily available to consumers soon. - StupotAce, on 09/05/2008, -2/+3I didn't read the article because it was written by a girl. She looked kinda cute though.
- AgmLauncher, on 09/05/2008, -5/+19I'm so sick of hearing theory speak.
"a Toronto-based company launched last summer, believes it has the answer to creating simple and cheap solar concentrators."
BELIEVES it has the answer.
MIGHT have the answer
IS CLOSE to an answer
SEES A POTENTIAL answer
Christ....
When are we going to read an article that has a pair of balls to it.
"Solar company XYZ has done it: Solar panels that operate at 90% efficiency for $5/kW. These panels will be available everywhere on the planet tomorrow."
Stop reporting news until there is something to report. It's the same story with different technology and it's quite frankly, getting annoying.- sotloo, on 09/05/2008, -0/+5OMG Thank you. I wish I'd said it ...
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -3/+1Wow great attitude there, buddy
- zacharytelschow, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Being annoyed with spamming for products not yet produced isn't some kind of attitude problem. If I kept telling you I maybe someday could produce the worlds most comfortable king size bed for $10 and told you every week or so ad nauseum despite making no actual strides, wouldn't you be annoyed as well?
- thematrixexpert, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4well said.
- mpoulin, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3"If Morgan Solar’s panels work as planned, concentrated solar may become a viable technology for countries that can’t afford the expensive systems available today" Yeah, like the United States.
- akanpurwala, on 09/05/2008, -2/+4I would love to believe in this, but I keep seeing digg articles about the next super generation of solar panels that should revolutionize the industry and yet inevitable don't materialize. I feel that the only way for it to become a reality is if the government subsidizes and forces mass production, yielding sizable declines in costs to manufacture and sparking more industry wide growth and research.
- AgmLauncher, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3I don't believe too much in government intervention, but it's pretty clear that the free market has been dragging it's ***** ass on this for 30 years, and that's unacceptable. If the government needs to light a few fires under people's asses and inject some tax dollars into R&D for a few years so that we have can have a century's worth of cleaner, cheaper power that is regulated by the free market once the painful re-adjustment period has passed, then so be it.
As far as I'm concerned, energy is a matter of national security and there's little difference between spending tax dollars on bullets, and spending tax dollars on solar/wind/geothermal research and incentives.- akanpurwala, on 09/06/2008, -0/+0I believe in government intervention in situations where the private market won't necessarily reap benefits in the short term (what they're looking for), but would ultimately provide more than just economic gains (e.g. economic, social, etc.). I think that is a much better use of our tax dollars than what we're currently invested in.
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -2/+1Our neo-con war mongering government doesn't give a ***** about the environment right now. THAT is the real problem.
- zacharytelschow, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1It has nothing to do with government sudsidies, but the realistic boundaries of advancement. Solar panels have been getting better and better at a faster and faster rate (similar to the exponential advancements made by computer processors). Throwing money at the problem isn't going to stretch the theoretical boundaries found in today's technologies. If you don't think there's enough free market incentive to work on this problem, you're dead wrong. How many solar panel companies are there vs. how many people do you know that own solar panels? There's a reason for that.
- AgmLauncher, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3I don't believe too much in government intervention, but it's pretty clear that the free market has been dragging it's ***** ass on this for 30 years, and that's unacceptable. If the government needs to light a few fires under people's asses and inject some tax dollars into R&D for a few years so that we have can have a century's worth of cleaner, cheaper power that is regulated by the free market once the painful re-adjustment period has passed, then so be it.
- MWeather, on 09/05/2008, -2/+2So what's the difference between a solar concentrator, and a magnifying glass?
- dsmx, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3Quick, simple, effective and cheap. 4 words you put in any proposal that will get people to agree with it.
- NotYourProdigy, on 09/05/2008, -2/+0Wow, those are amazing. We destroyed a different point of view, and pop culture got popular. That only took 40 years after landing on the moon?
- sponeil, on 09/05/2008, -2/+2"Their system uses a thin sheet of acrylic to concentrate sunlight 750 times. The sunlight is directed to a tiny cell on the edge of the plastic, greatly reducing the amount of material needed."
So if I cover my roof with this acrylic without a collector, will it fry everything around the perimeter of my house? - Markab3, on 09/05/2008, -2/+0This sounds good, but as we all know Morgan Solar really doesn't have much hope for the future unless they can corner the global energy market. Being the faction with all the credits just gets you attacked by people like the Hive. That bastard Yang and his hovertanks.
- ButterLoyalist, on 09/05/2008, -1/+1Sweet! My electric bill last month was $24. Will buying solar panels help save me money?
- zacharytelschow, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Yes. Invest $20,000 in solar panels and your electric bill will hover around $0 for the year. Don't worry, assuming the panels don't break and electricity prices remain relatively steady, you'll recoup your initial investment in around 7 decades (present value calculation). Sounds like a great deal, doesn't it?
- r00fus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1I hate you. I pay more than triple that now, and close to 5x that in winter.
Solar isn't cost effective for you, but it would be for me.
- sotloo, on 09/05/2008, -0/+2They really need to put some real technical details on their product page. Otherwise they run the risk of looking like a pump-and-dump investment scam waiting to happen.
- DeuceDiggalow, on 09/05/2008, -0/+3All you solar-panel haters are going to be lining up to buy these things as soon as this technology hits the market. Either that or you'll all be over at my house enjoying free air conditioning!!
- beabis, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3This technology will never ever hit the market. But we will be reading articles about how they are working on improving it for decades.
- xeocube, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Too bad this won't be able to be used in more places than you'd think. Solar concentrators need direct solar radiation, unlike solar cells, to harness the suns power. Anywhere you have any sort of pollution, high moisture content, clouds - basically anything that will diffuse light - in the air, solar concentrators become unusable.
- NicMorgan, on 09/05/2008, -0/+2We weren't quite ready for the main page of Digg. Our graphic artist is developing some more images now, our web guy is getting the final touches on the product page ready for next week. So, to tide things over, we've uploaded a few images and some more details to our blog:
http://www.morgansolar.com/blog/
More is coming soon, by the middle of next week definitely. We're getting our first prototypes ready right now, and we'll be installing them here in Ontario, and showing them at the Solar Power International 2008 convention this October in San Diego.
- Nic Morgan
Biz Dev Director
Morgan Solar Inc.
(Yikes!)- samotage, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Great stuff going on there Nic. Keep at it!
Sam.
- samotage, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Great stuff going on there Nic. Keep at it!
- nosatalian, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1While I agree with the previous poster- that this is the same old solar hoopla that hasn't materialized before - you'd have to be an idiot to think that wasting government dollars is going to make anything better. No amount of "alternative energy payola" is going to produce efficient power until science gets there. You can't just pour 5 billion (trillion) dollars at a field and expect it to magically be solved. If the technology had the potential to become profitable, many investors would be interested and you wouldn't need government subsidies. Government subsidies are only necessary where there is no longterm economic sense to what you are doing.
Smart decisions would be to use existing nearly infinite andcheap power sources like nuclear power, but the same left wing radicals who invented anthropomorphic global warming are the people who have blocked nuclear power development such that there hasn't been a new nuclear reactor in the US since the 1970s. - zacharytelschow, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2I don't even need to read the article; the description says enough.
"Morgan Solar believes it has the answer..."
If they had created something worth writing about, the headline would read "Morgan Solar selling solar panels that are cost competitive with coal." But it doesn't read that. And there's a very good reason for that. When they start selling alternative energy sources that are cost competitive (or at least close), let me know. Until then, enough with the green energy spam already.- doofusoftheday, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3Exactly.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is