Came across this US based solar panel supplier in passing. Not an ad. I have no financial or other interests in this company and have never been in contact with them. They seem to be as price competitive as most for PV panels and offer a wide range of supporting equipment. This seems to be a useful site for providing an indication of where US domestic solar pricing is going - plus some useful technical content in faq and blog formats. Their lowest $/Watt Sun brand panel prices are approaching what I've seen recently ex China in small volume. _____________ Head office in Miami and an outlet in Phoenix. http://sunelec.com/ They have their own "Sun" brand panels available ex USA for as little as $1.98/Watt (100 Watt panel) but more typically at $2 - $3 per Watt range depending on Wattage and other factors. Their very cheapest Sun brand panels are said to be cosmetic 2nds but functionally 100%. They also offer name brand panels (Kyocera, Rec, Evergreen Solar, Sanyo and Solarworld, ...) usually at higher $/Watt than their own. They also offer supporting equipment such as controllers (MPPT and other), batteries, inverters (grid tied & standalone), chargers etc. Overall they look and sound good. YMMV. They SAY that their own "Sun" brand panels are made for them in the US "by one of the world's largest manufacturers". This may be true - although it would be challenging to compete with Chinese labour rates unless they have nearly 100% automated manufacture - which is entirely possible with something like a solar panel. (I have seen high wattage Chinese solar panels being fabricated under "cottage industry" conditions with the minimum of automation*, to produce panels which are visually and functionally (as far as can be told) equal to any others). (* Large laminating presses and NC controlled LASER PV cell cutters with otherwise essentially manual fabrication). The actual PV cells would quite possibly be being made in China, but it is in fact feasible that they could be made elsewhere due to the necessarily high automation and material component of the wafer product. I haven't directly compared the cost of their inverters and other electronics with eg Chinese offerings, but at a glance they seem somewhat more expensive than I'd expect. Their claims for PV panel longevity match those for the industry generally and they offer anecdotal evidence which implies that some of their early panels are still running at near full original output after 35 years. This would be 'extremely good' as actual PV material output will decrease with age, quite apart from degradation of light transmission and degradation of the rear anti-reflective layers. Industry claims are typically less than 5% loss for the first 10 years and less than 10% for the next 10. (Interestingly this is also what is claimed for optical transmissivity loss for good quality "properly" UV inhibited transparent Polycarbonate sheet.)(Inadequately UV protected polycarbonate can can an extremely short optical lifetime). "Clear" polycarbonate has about 8% optical loss initially at thicknesses typically used for roofing and this may be slightly lower loss than the thicker low-iron glass used for silicon PV panels. Consequently, while EVA-glass is the 'gold standard' for commercial silicon PV panel manufacture, a well made polycarbonate protected solar system may perform as well or better electrically than an EVA-glass system.) A major EVA-glass PV panel longevity factor is the quality of the EVA adhesive used to bond the silicon cells to the glass. Despite EVA sheet being widely available in China, to get maximum longevity an experienced Chinese PV panel manufacture that I have had dealings with uses only EVA imported from Germany. In many cases country of origin is less important than the experience of the company involved. Q-cells, arguably the largest manufacturer of silicon PV cells is German but has manufacturing plants worldwide including, of course, in China. _________________ Related: QCells predict that the present 15-16% efficiency of polycrystalline silicon (PCS) PV material should be able to be increased to around 18% with expected technology improvements*. Monocrystalline silicon (MCS) cells are expected to reach 20%+. (Multijunction cells are already well above that limit and cells for satellite use are higher again due to the wider available solar spectrum, but such 'extreme' solutions are liable to be too expensive for mass market use). CdTe cells are already exceeding 10% efficiency, with much lower manufacturing costs, and CIGS cells are also showing substantial promise - although materials availability and Cd content are liable to make these competitors to Silicon less viable in the very long term. Abundant raw material availability and improved methods means that silicon may yet be the preferred long term high volume solution. Various "sliced" or sliver silicon variants offer both lower material costs than existing silicon wafer PV panels and mechanical flexibility approaching that of thin film competitors. Gains from MPPT (maximum power point tracking) controllers are usually in excess of the expected improvements in polycrystalline silicon efficiency. (MPPT effectively provides dynamic impedance matching between the PV panel and load (usually a battery) under varying solar insolation. Depending on controller cost, use of MPPT to optimise panel efficiency may be cheaper than paying more for top efficiency cells. The higher efficincies of monocrystalline cells is offset by a higher price. Whether the higher price is economically justifiable depends on the cost implications of decreased panel area per power output or increased output per panel area of MCS relative to PCS. Where maximum panel area is fixed or smallest size per power is desirable due eg to wind loading then the extra cost of MCS may be justified. Where minimum $/Watt matters or where panel area is not overly important then PCS may be preferable. Mechanical mounting costs increase somewhat with larger size (larger frames, higher wind loadings and mass, ...). Russell McMahon -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist