Solar Energy and Polysilicon Shortages to End in 2008

http://www.tmcnet.com/green/articles/21387-solar-energy-polysilicon-shortages-end-2008.htm

The solar energy industry continues to witness rapid growth as climate changes receive more and more attention internationally, according to a report (http://www.energy.frost.com) released by Frost & Sullivan (News - Alert). The research firm reveals that the Global Solar Photovoltaic Market had accrued revenues of $6.49 billion in 2005 and is expected to grow to more than $16 billion in 2012. This rapid growth has led to a phenomenal increase in the demand for polysilicon.

Despite the growth, the solar photovoltaic industry has been facing issues such as shortage and allocation of polysilicon, which is the critical component of the majority of solar panels. However, this year, a radical change in the scenario is expected. According to Frost & Sullivan, polysilicon supply will be able to meet the demand, thus ensuring better opportunities for the solar energy industry.

"We expect polysilicon supply to catch up with the demand already in 2008," Alina Bakhareva, Renewable Energy Programme Manager at Frost & Sullivan, was quoted as saying in the report. "The majority of the new quantities will be supplied to the market by top 4 producers that are expanding their existing production capacities."

Apparently, the demand for silicon feedstock had reached 26,000 tonnes in 2004. In 2005, wafer production had increased by around 7 per cent. Despite this, the market need wasn’t met. In 2006, the feedstock shortage had begun to dramatically affect solar panel production, hampering the growth of the industry.

<more>

The more the merrier...

:)

Environ. Sci. Tech.

Wanna know what it says?

No?

I didn't think so.

New photovoltaics change solar costs

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2008/feb/science/nl_pvlifecycle.html?sa_campaign=rss

New photovoltaic technologies, such as the recent introduction of thin-film cadmium–telluride (CdTe) materials, have nearly doubled the efficiency of solar cells within the past few years. But the methods of making the materials used for photovoltaic cells, whether from silicon, metal, or other material, have raised doubts about the environmental friendliness of these passive energy collectors. Purifying and producing silicon uses a lot of water and energy, and refining zinc and copper ores to get Cd, Te, and other elements creates metal emissions and an energy sink—all of which increase the technology's environmental footprint.

A new life-cycle assessment (LCA) of some of the leading photovoltaic technologies, published in ES&T (DOI: 10.1021/es071763q), shows that some may be better than others, particularly when it comes to emissions over their lifetimes. Overall, however, replacing traditional electricity grids fueled by gas, coal, and other means with photovoltaics would cut emissions of greenhouse gases, particulate matter, and other pollutants by 89–98%. Rooftop panels could further reduce emissions because of the resulting decrease in transmission lines and other infrastructure. But each form of photovoltaics has a different LCA profile, specific to heavy-metal emissions and electricity use in particular, the new analysis shows.

<snip>

The analysis took into account frames, cables, and other necessary support materials, as well as the energy required for manufacturing under three scenarios, each with a different proportion of electricity coming from coal, natural gas, or other sources. The team based their assumptions on ground-mounted systems under southern European light conditions, over 30-year lifetimes.

In the end, the CdTe photovoltaics came out on top. With more efficient energy conversion and the lowest cost, the technology used less energy and had fewer emissions overall, despite some Cd emissions during the manufacturing process. However, emissions from fossil-fuel-powered electricity dwarfed those Cd emissions by orders of magnitude.

<more>


CdTe photovoltaics: Life cycle environmental profile and comparisons

Thin Solid Films Volume 515, Issue 15, 31 May 2007, Pages 5961-5963

Abstract

We discuss the emissions of cadmium throughout all the life stages of CdTe PV modules, from extracting, refining, and purifying the raw materials to producing, using, and disposing or recycling of the modules. Then, we compare these emissions with those in the life cycle of three different types of crystalline Si PV modules. The energy requirement and energy pay back times (EPBT) of CdTe PV modules are considerably shorter than that of crystalline Si modules, although the latter exhibit higher efficiencies. This difference is primarily due to the energy used to process silicon, a fraction of which is derived from fossil fuels, inevitably producing Cd and many other heavy-metal emissions. The lower energy requirement of CdTe PV results in lower emissions of all pollutants, including cadmium.

<end>

http://www.firstsolar.com/environment_cdte.php

Environment CdTe Technology

First Solar's advanced CdTe technology is instrumental in accomplishing our environmental mission.
CdTe is uniquely capable of producing low cost solar modules, making widespread, cost-effective solar electricity a reality. Its physical properties are optimal for converting sunlight into electricity, resulting in highly efficient photovoltaics with thin (< 3 micron) semiconductor layers. CdTe is a robust material with the demonstrated capacity for high volume, low cost production.

CdTe is a semiconductor made by transforming cadmium and tellurium from their elemental forms into a stable semiconductor. The cadmium in First Solar's CdTe is derived from zinc smelting waste. The “up-cycling” of cadmium into safe, cost effective solar electricity not only reduces the toxic effects of fossil fuel generation but prevents potentially dangerous elemental cadmium from entering the environment.
For these reasons, research from the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory concluded:

Large-scale use of CdTe PV modules does not present any risks to health and the environment, and recycling the modules at the end of their useful life completely resolves any environmental concerns. During their operation, these modules do not produce any pollutants, and furthermore, by displacing fossil fuels, they offer great environmental benefits. CdTe PV modules appear to be more environmentally friendly than all other current uses of Cd.

Source: " RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS", Vol 8, 2004, pp 303 – 334, V M Fthenakis, “Life Cycle Impact Analysis of Cadmium in CdTe PV Production”, with permission from Elsevier.

BTW: what are the life cycle environmental impacts associated with the chalatan NJ molten salt breeder reactor???

ZERO

why?

Because it is "made up"...

As usual!

From the abstract you link:



Nowhere in this abstract is there any attempt to compare solar to other available greenhouse gas free technologies, nor is there any attempt to describe the cost of disposal of the electronic waste generated, or the toxicity of CdTe, or the cost of mining million metric ton quantities of cadmium and tellurium.

The next sentence contains the normal head-in-the-sand conditional tense word "could." There are next to zero "solar will save us" chants that fail to contain this word, and we now have 50 years of such sentences.

In fact, after 50 years of such talk, solar energy has not reduced 1% of carbon emissions, nor has it produced 1% of the world's electricity.

And it is metric ton quantities?

The heavy metal requirement of a Cd/Te solar cell represents 230 grams of CdTe+CdS+CdCl2+Sn+Ni/V+ITO+Sb2Te3 per square meter per solar cell. When this stuff becomes electronic waste - as inevitably it will be - it will be Chinese and Indian and Kenyan kids who will breathe and drink it, not the little coffee klatch at Mom's house.

Who here seriously believes that the solar industry will recover the cadmium leaking out of cadmium mines, cadmium transportation, water flows from industrial operations, volatile cadmium dust?


The figures for the heavy metal materials handling are reported in Raugei, Bargigli, and Ulgiati "Life cycle assessment and energy pay-back time of advanced photovoltaic modules: CdTe and CIS compared to poly-Si" Energy 32 (2007) 1310–1318.

And of course, you now propose placing millions upon million upon brazillions of square meters distributed as point source pollutants. In fact, the mass/energy density of solar technology is enormous and the point is to distribute this toxicity throughout the planet, making recovery difficult and unlikely.


The above cited paper gives greenhouse gas emissions per kwh of solar electricity produced as between 17 and 48 grams of carbon dioxide per kwh of electricity produced, making it anywhere from 2 to 5 times higher than the greenhouse gas impact of nuclear energy as reported in the "wind will save us" article written by Denholm on the external cost of compressed air wind power. (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 1903-1911). I quote:




The bold is mine.

again