Just had a PV system installed- Cheshire

zeupater

Cardew wrote: »

I wasn't aware of that - do you have a link to that statement?

Hi

I've seen a number of references to panel degradation being accelerated in the first few months before becoming linear, then again, there are other reports which seem to suggest that apart from an initial buildup of dirt on the panels it's almost completely linear ...

Here's a link to some rare long term analysis which supports accelerated degradation from TÜV SÜD Group .... http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/pvrw2010_kuitche.pdf ... as TÜV are an MCS testing and certification body it's probably as good a source of independent data as is possible. For those who don't want to read the entire presentation, their research summary on page 16 is probably considered as being relevant .....

Still think it's an initial build-up of grime though ..... wonder if the latest generation of self-cleaning glass which is now being used on better panels would make a difference ....

HTH
Z

zeupater

AliRay wrote: »

I'm not allowed to post links yet, but I've found this www. genohm .eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32&Itemid=28



During the first few weeks Thin Film or A-si has an additional BONUS output, 30% above the output stated (for example, a 100Wp A-si panel will produce 150W~170W for its first few week output).
If the stated output is 100Wp, it will drop less than 1% from this rated output (If you calculate the drop of the extra 30% BONUS as a loss you get 30% apparent loss, when in fact its real loss was 0%).

Hi

a=Si is amorphous silicon, your panels are crystalline silicon (c-Si) which, being wafer based and not thin film, would possibly degrade differently ....

There is a caveat to this remark ... if you have hybrid panels, the proportion of the overall performance from the thin film could degrade at this rate, with the wafers not, but surely this would be reflected as a higher expected degradation for the hybrid panels within their published specifications ....

HTH
Z

AliRay_2

I understand that the Sanyo panels we have have the mono-crystalline wafer surrounded by ultra-thin amorphous silicon layers which is what is suppose to make them more efficient than previous Sanyo PV panels, so I'm unsure if the loss is that relevant??

zeupater

AliRay wrote: »

I understand that the Sanyo panels we have have the mono-crystalline wafer surrounded by ultra-thin amorphous silicon layers which is what is suppose to make them more efficient than previous Sanyo PV panels, so I'm unsure if the loss is that relevant??

Hi

The combination of the two technologies into a single unit is what is usually referred to as a hybrid panel. This is how the Sanyo panels can deliver more power per square metre of panel area and why I made reference to a caveat in the previous post ..... if the a-Si does degrade at the 30% rate it would have a significant and early detectable effect on the performance of the panels, however, the panel specs don't show a degradation which is significantly different from any other manufacturer ...

If I had hybrid panels, I probably wouldn't be any more worried about degradation than anyone else ....

HTH
Z

Gizmosmum_2

Cardew wrote: »

Surely a higher efficiency panel just makes it smaller?

i.e. a 225wp panel of any make will produce the same output under the same conditions of 'sunlight' temp etc.

Maybe I could have phrased that better what I meant to say was that the Sanyo panels theoretically produce a higher yield for the same size system as a result of the thin film/monocrystalline combination.

MintMark

Gizmosmum wrote: »

Maybe I could have phrased that better what I meant to say was that the Sanyo panels theoretically produce a higher yield for the same size system as a result of the thin film/monocrystalline combination.

I agree. I think the assertion you quoted (all 225kWp panels produce the same output under the same conditions) is only true for the standard test conditions that give rise to the 225kWp rating.

I wonder whether the hybrid panels will out perform other panels in less than ideal conditions... time will tell I guess. The Sanyo specs suggest that performance decreases less as temperature rises compared to other panels.

Mark

(long time reader, first time poster, recently new panel owner!)

Cardew

MintMark wrote: »

I agree. I think the assertion you quoted (all 225kWp panels produce the same output under the same conditions) is only true for the standard test conditions that give rise to the 225kWp rating.

I wonder whether the hybrid panels will out perform other panels in less than ideal conditions... time will tell I guess. The Sanyo specs suggest that performance decreases less as temperature rises compared to other panels.

Mark

(long time reader, first time poster, recently new panel owner!)

Welcome to the forum.


Agreed there could be a difference for a number of parameters e.g. roof pitch, temp, - even degradation of output over years.


It would be very easy for WHICH etc to 'back to back' test panels.

My gut feeling is the differences would be marginal or when using the SAP calculation it would say Sharp panels - X kWh/pa, Sanyo panels - ykWh/pa etc.

solar_panel

Can anyone please give me details of a company that can do my solar panel installation? Or can you please give me a review on Monument Renewables in Newcastle (Only if you have used them). Their website address is m-rt.co.uk

Thank you