Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Posting PR's is fine. I just thought that there might have been an article since the last PR is from 4/21.
Thanks, JB
All I saw there is Natcore's PR's. Is there something I missed?
JB
Teezo, why did you post the link.
JB
My pleasure, thanks for starting the board.
The new lab will be open in June. I can hardly wait for the coming developments.
JB
I replied to a question comparing Natcore to FSLR and Nanosolar at mystockbuddy.com. I figured I'd post it here.
The article below this diagram for Natcore shows First Solar has already achieved $.75 per watt and Nanosolar is working towards $.63 per watt but currently at $1.35. What am I missing here if the competition is already at Natcore's goal?
The combination of all three operating in tandem would produce well over 30% efficiency - or about double the output of current technology.
For reference, review the accompanying schematic of a third-generation, silicon-quantum dot tandem solar cell.
Following Through
Nanosolar 2.0: New Attitude and New Deals for Up to 1 GW of Solar Panels
A CIGS photovoltaic panel player rebounds after some setbacks.
Nanosolar, the CIGS (CuInGaSe) solar module aspirant, has been cutting a lower profile compared to its brash early years.
The 300-employee, San Jose, California-based firm has reset its management team with a focus on operations and seems to be making some progress on the technical and commercial fronts.
As one of the first wave of capital-intensive, VC-funded, next-generation thin-film solar companies, the company raised a lot of cash (more than $400 million in private equity) but was prone to over-promising and under-delivering. Faced with an economic slowdown, a precipitous decline in global module pricing, a bit of boardroom carnage that brought in a new CEO (Geoff Tate, formerly of Rambus and AMD) -- the firm stayed relatively quiet in 2010 and regrouped. (Tom Cheyney of PV-Tech did get an audience with the firm in their most notable press account of 2010.)
The new CEO told me, "We've made huge progress; we've grafted an operations process onto the company."
Nanosolar has re-emerged in its 2011 incarnation, presumably a bit humbled, but set on having 115 megawatts of capacity online by the end of the year. What bluster remains in the company comes in the form of an ambitious cost and efficiency roadmap with these goals:
Below $1.00 per watt factory cost by the end of this year
Low $0.80s or high $0.70s per watt by late next year
In the $0.60s in 2013
Below $0.60 per watt in 2014
Our analyst team estimates their current cost in the $1.35 per watt range. Tate suggested that cost reduction will come from improved sourcing, ramping yields, growing volume to spread the overhead across more units, and optimizing the recipe.
Nanosolar produced 2.5 megawatts of panels last year. This year they'll ship "double digit" megawatts and "triple digits" in 2012, according to the CEO. Cell production capacity will be 115 megawatts by the end of 2011 and the next step jumps the firm to 250 megawatts of cell capacity in San Jose. Panel assembly is performed at their factory in Luckenwalde, Germany.
The firm is shipping 10 percent efficiency panels today with a target of 12 percent efficiency next year. Expectations are for 13 percent in 2013 and 14 percent in 2014. Tate joked that he'd like to keep the trend going to 99 percent efficiency in 2099. In any case, a 4 percentage point increase in efficiency in four years would be unprecedented by any solar firm.
The company is focused solely on utility-scale deployments. Their large utility-size panels are currently rated at 200 watts with output gains expected as efficiency rises. Brian Stone, the VP of Sales and Marketing, maintains that the edge box, low voltage, and size of the Nanosolar panels lend themselves to reductions in balance of systems (BoS) costs and incur less of a BoS penalty than do other lower-efficiency panels.
Nanosolar announced that they have signed long-term supply agreements for up to one gigawatt of PV panels with Belectric of Kolitzheim, Germany; EDF Energies Nouvelles of Paris, France; and Plain Energy of Munich, Germany.
Take that "long-term supply agreement" lingo with a grain of salt. These contracts are not binding, are not take-or-pay, and are based on Nanosolar achieving its cost and efficiency targets. Although those agreements don't translate as real backlog, they do translate to patient customers who appear willing to work with Nanosolar. Nanosolar, as a new supplier without a field performance track record, employs module warranty insurance to help financiers and customers feel comfortable and improve their bankability.
The Factory Tour
Nanosolar’s roll-to-roll printing process potentially lets the company benefit from low capital expenditure and high throughput. Nanosolar operates the roll-to-roll solar cell printing factory in San Jose, California and Stone and Ravi Balaji, VP Cell Operations, gave me the tour.
The CEO said, "We're not a CIGS company like all the rest."
The emphasis is clearly on the roll-to-roll process and the printing model in this factory as one watches the 1,200-meter-long foil spools transported from process to process. There is a vacuum printing process for the bottom electrode and the top conductor, but the application of the nanoparticle CIG ink is what one would imagine a printing step on a fast moving substrate would look like -- albeit at room temperature and room pressure. The TCO layer is sputtered, but Stone sees the process eventually becoming a printing step as well. For Nanosolar, "less sputtering equals less capex."
No booties or shower caps are required on the factory floor, which also did not require a lot of human intervention in the highly automated processes. Once the layers have been applied, selenized, and sintered, the now-semiconductor is hole-punched for the vias, processed and sectioned into cells, which are then tested and binned for shipment to Germany where they will be assembled into modules. Each cell is about 2.5 watts and there are about 29 cells per meter of substrate.
Tate, the CEO, suggested that it would be difficult for any firm to get better than First Solar if they went down a similar vacuum deposition or sputtering path. The answer to becoming better than First Solar lies in the relative simplicity of the printing model, according to Nanosolar.
Nanosolar still has big goals -- "Building the Low Cost Thin Film Leader," as they said in a press release. That would mean achieving lower costs than First Solar, which is currently at $0.75 per watt and has a credible roadmap to get below $0.63 per watt.
But as Brian Stone, the VP of Sales and Marketing put it -- their competition isn't really First Solar, other CIGS companies or even China's crystalline silicon firms: their competition is natural gas and coal.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/nanosolar-in-deals-for-up-to-1-gw-of-utility-solar-panels/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed:+greentechmedia/news+(Greentech+Media:+News)
Tape 660, good question.
The diagram is from 2009 and applies to silicon solar panels. Trina Solar is the current silicon panel leader and is expected to reduce their cost to under $1.00 per watt in 2011 with a 16-17% efficiency. Natcore's LPD Anti-Reflective tandem coating is expected to double the efficiency and reduce the silicon needed by 60-66%. This should drop the cost per watt way below 63 cents. Natcore does not manufacture the panels. However, Natcore believes that their LPD technology is so disruptive that panel manufacturers will be forced to adopt it.
First Solar and Nanosolar compete in the thin film solar market. This market is where Natcore's roll to roll product will compete. We haven't been given alot of info regarding this product, but I will share what I do know ...
Last December, Natcore's CEO told me that the price would be below 60 cents per watt.
From Natcore PR's,
“The nanostructured flexible thin film solar cell that we’re developing is made using our patented LPD technology,” continues Provini. “Both the fabrication process and the cell structure covered by this new patent are exclusive to Natcore. The near-term module efficiency using this technology is projected to be equivalent to commercial silicon modules at 15% to 16%, and the longer-term improvements could raise the efficiency to 20% or more.”
Nanosolar is at 10% efficiency and FSLR is around 11% efficiency.
The first-generation products from Vanguard’s method could produce 15%-16% efficiencies at module costs of 60¢ to 70¢ per watt. It is anticipated that second-generation technology could achieve 20% efficiencies at even lower costs per watt. The investment for production facilities is projected as low as $10 million to $15 million per 100-megawatt to 150-megawatt production capability, as compared with current costs of as much as $250 million for standard solar-cell production facilities. Vanguard’s production equipment would be designed for insertion into an existing roll-to-roll film-coating line of the sort that has been displaced by the emergence of digital photography. All production materials are widely available and dramatically cheaper than silicon and other thin film systems. If successfully developed, the process would enable a very cost-efficient production capability in large-scale facilities.
Vanguard is a company that Natcore bought. Notice that the production facilities cost is projected to be as low as $10-$15 million for 100-150 megawatt capacity. Nanosolar has $400 million invested and hopes for 115 megawatts by year end (it looks like).
From PR ... "We believe that Natcore's LPD technology truly provides a paradigm shift in driving the cost of solar manufacturing and we wanted to be an intregel part of that solution. We feel privileged to have been chosen as the equipment development partner," states Tom Vukosav, President and CEO of MicroTech Systems Inc. (Natcore states disruptive, MicroTech states paradigm shift)
Solar is a huge market and growing rapidly. The growth will only accelerate as solar becomes cheaper. I have invested in Natcore because I believe that they will do what they say they'll do. I have a great deal of confidence in the company's founders and officers.
Dr. Dennis Flood is Natcore's Chief Technology Officer. He is very helpful.
Good Luck, JB
Ya, I wonder if Dr. Flood is raising money for exercising warrants.
JB
Yes, GE has bought Primestar Solar.
http://primestarsolar.com/solar-energy-news/_pdf/2011-04-07%20News%20Release-Merger%20&%20Solar%20Milestone.pdf
GE's 12.8% efficient thin film panels may compete successfully with First Solar. GE currently has the higher efficiency.
Natcore is a start-up company that boasts a new patented wet chemistry technology that has many applications. There is a ton of information at natcoresolar.com.
With regards to the thin film arena (GE's niche) ...
The newest patent, which is solely owned by Natcore, describes the use of inorganic semiconductor-coated nanotubes to make high-efficiency thin-film solar cells. Natcore is currently in talks with Eastman Kodak and with Phono Solar of China to commercialize this new technology on equipment that was used to manufacture photo film until that market weakened with the growth of digital photography.
“In order for solar energy to become economically viable, one of two things must happen,” says Chuck Provini, Natcore’s president and CEO. “Someone must find a way either to double the efficiency of solar cells, or to halve their cost. Natcore is responding to both of those challenges. Our scientists working at Rice University continue to make important progress on an all-silicon tandem solar cell, which would bring huge gains in efficiency. And with this new patent, thin film solar cells may be the ultimate future of photovoltaic solar energy technology because their lower materials usage should result in lower manufacturing cost in very high volume production.
“The nanostructured flexible thin film solar cell that we’re developing is made using our patented LPD technology,” continues Provini. “Both the fabrication process and the cell structure covered by this new patent are exclusive to Natcore. The near-term module efficiency using this technology is projected to be equivalent to commercial silicon modules at 15% to 16%, and the longer-term improvements could raise the efficiency to 20% or more.”
JB
Han bought 100,000 shares under his Rule 10b5-1 plan.
SEC Rule 10b5-1 is a regulation enacted by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2000. The SEC states that Rule 10b5-1 was enacted in order to resolve an unsettled issue over the definition of insider trading, which is prohibited by SEC Rule 10b-5.
JB
dough, below is from Natcore's website. Natcore has tremendous potential within AND outside of solar. The new lab will enable Natcore to research LPD applications that will surprise all of us.
Overview: The Game Is Changing ...
Natcore was formed to utilize technology, licensed from Rice University, that enables the controlled deposition of silicon dioxide and mixed silicon oxides from an aqueous solution at ambient temperatures and pressures.
That’s quite a mouthful. So let’s look at it in layman’s terms...
Silicon dioxide, or silica, is a fundamental building block in semiconductors, fiber optics and, of course, solar cells. It is an absolutely essential element in all these applications, and it is currently deposited onto silicon through a process called “Thermal Oxide Growth.”
Simply put, this process uses complicated, multi-million-dollar furnaces, operating in a vacuum and at temperatures of up to 1,000º Celsius (1,800º Fahrenheit), to grow the necessary thin films of silicon dioxide. In contrast, Natcore’s “Liquid Phase Deposition” (LPD) process simply grows these thin films of silicon dioxide in mild chemical baths using standard, low-cost equipment.
Because Natcore’s process is so relatively mild, it allows for much thinner silicon wafers, as well as the development of advanced materials and devices that would be destroyed during the standard Thermal Oxide Growth process.
Natcore’s "Liquid Phase Deposition" (LPD) process was discovered at Rice University and has been independently tested and validated in an industrial laboratory setting at one of America’s most respected laboratories.
In short, the technology is now ready to be tailored to specific applications. The films and processes Natcore plans to move into commercial production promise to have significant impacts on solar cells, semiconductor devices, optical and optoelectronic components, prescriptive and protective eyewear, and energy-saving architectural coatings, among many other uses.
The first products are planned for the rapidly growing silicon solar cell manufacturing industry.
JB
TLON ...
TooNiceStocks Initiates Coverage on Talon Therapeutics Inc. Near Term Catalyst Long Term Potential
TooNiceStocks research has found that Talon Therapeutics is poised for major breakthroughs with their patented drug Marqibo. Marqibo is a nanoparticle encapsulated cancer therapeutic. This unique technology enhances efficacy while reducing toxicity.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/4/prweb8328289.htm
Great Board! Thanks,
JB
Natcore's future applications from the power point presentation on their website includes ...
OPTICS: Optical Detectors and Components, Optoelectronics (passive and active devices) High-Resolution optical detectors and Artificial Retina Implants
Optoelectronics alone looks like it could be a huge sector for Natcore. Check out GT Solar's equipment (FURNACES) sale to a Chinese Company ...
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/gtsolar/template.NDM/english/?javax.portlet.tpst=20fbc9efb7900ee969918d296b965bac_ws_MX&javax.portlet.prp_20fbc9efb7900ee969918d296b965bac_newsLang=en&javax.portlet.prp_20fbc9efb7900ee969918d296b965bac_viewID=news_view&javax.portlet.prp_20fbc9efb7900ee969918d296b965bac_ndmHsc=v2*A1072962000000*B1303944275000*C4102491599000*DgroupByDate*J2*N1005277&javax.portlet.prp_20fbc9efb7900ee969918d296b965bac_newsId=20110427006256&beanID=149255164&viewID=news_view&javax.portlet.begCacheTok=com.vignette.cachetoken&javax.portlet.endCacheTok=com.vignette.cachetoken
GT Solar Receives $218.9 Million Order for Advanced Sapphire Crystallization Furnaces from Guizhou Haotian Optoelectronics Technology Co. LTD
Market momentum continues for GT’s cost-reducing sapphire crystal growth technology
MERRIMACK, N.H.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--GT Solar International, Inc. (NASDAQ: SOLR), a global provider of polysilicon production technology, and sapphire and silicon crystalline growth systems and materials for the solar, LED and other specialty markets, today announced that it has received an order for its advanced sapphire crystallization furnaces totaling $218.9 million from Guizhou Haotian Optoelectronics Technology Co. LTD (HTOT). The order marks HTOT’s entrance into the fast-growing LED industry, and continues GT Solar’s market momentum for its sapphire crystalline growth technology based on its advanced sapphire furnace. The order will be included in GT Solar’s backlog for its current Q1 FY12, which ends on July 2, 2011.
“Our entrance into the LED market offers a new strategic growth opportunity for our company and Guiyang City as well as the Guizhou region of China,” said Mr. Hao Xu, chairman of the board of Guizhou Industrial Investment Group. “Our new sapphire production facility will help to stimulate economic growth in the region and establish HTOT as a leading supplier of material to the LED industry. This project requires a technology partner that can deliver reliable, highly productive equipment as well as installation and support know-how to quickly get our new factory up and running. We selected GT Solar because of its leading technology, proven track record, and years of experience enabling cost-effective, high-volume manufacturing.”
“We are pleased that HTOT has selected our advanced sapphire crystallization furnaces and look forward to a long and successful partnership over the coming years,” said Tom Gutierrez, GT Solar’s president and CEO. “We continue to see growing interest from companies looking to enter the fast-growing LED industry. Our sapphire crystal growth technology provides a proven path to producing high quality material, and our global installation and support resources enable our customers to quickly ramp to high volume, low-cost manufacturing.”
GT Solar’s advanced sapphire furnace technology is the result of over 40 years of continual process improvement and development at Crystal Systems, which was acquired by GT Solar in July of 2010. Crystal Systems is recognized as one of the leading providers of quality sapphire material for the LED and specialty optical and mechanical industries.
IMHO, patience here will be richly rewarded.
JB
ck123 post on Stockhouse ...
Solar market prediction.
This is where Natcore comes in ...
Natcore has had offshore funding available since last September, if not sooner. However, we don't know what the conditions and risks are. 'Free' grant money would be nice and is still a possibility from state and local sources.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Natcore sought a US partner for more than a year before partnering with the Chinese.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011104220325
JB
westeffer, article mentioning Provini's desire to keep jobs in US.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011104220325
Last paragraph ...
The company is trying to raise $15 million to move into manufacturing. While some foreign investors and foreign governments have offered funding, "We're passionate about trying to keep these jobs here," Provini said.
I don't know if this is good or not, but, I trust Natcore to do the right thing.
JB
Posted on 12-10-10.
I had a phone conversation with Chuck Provini yesterday.
I asked him to lay out the companies financials. He stated that most of the pp dollars will be used to fund the new lab, which will bring Natcore's technology to market sooner. Natcore's current cash burn rate is $70,000 per month. It is expected to reach $100,000 per month after the new lab is opened.
Chuck feels that the $5 million Natcore expects to receive from warrant conversions in 2011 will sustain the company until they are profitable.
Tandem cell and roll to roll are both top priorities. There are 3 companies in the hunt to partner with Natcore in the roll to roll business. Both tandem cell and roll to roll are projected to cost $.60 per watt to manufacture. I could be wrong, but from what I've read, TSL is the current low cost silicon producer. TSL is expected to lower it's costs below $1.00 in the first half of 2011.
Three ovens are used to manufacture silicon solar panels. Natcore believes that they have eliminated the need for two of these ovens with their LPD process. They will work on eliminating the third.
GLTA Longs,
JB
Absolutely domasselin, time to market is critical. Fortunately, the last PR confirms that Natcore plans to accelerate their time table.
Natcore's cash burn rate was $70,000 per month last December according to Provini. Also in December, he anticipated a $100,000 per month burn rate after establishing the new lab. Obviously, at that time Perini was figuring on allocating $30,000 per month to the new lab.
The latest PR tells us that there will be two labs, a clean room, offices, and eight employees. Natcore will be allocating multiples of $30,000 per month for this I'm sure.
IT appears that the pending arrival of Natcore's Intelligent Processing System, and the May and September expiration dates for $5,000,000 worth of warrents, have given Natcore the ability to become more aggressive.
GO,GO,GO
JB
Solar Power Interest Grows in Ontario ...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/04/21/solar-power-ontario.html?ref=rss
Climate Risk: Yet Another Reason To Choose Renewable Energy ...
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/04/yet-another-reason-to-choose-renewable-energy?cmpid=WNL-Friday-April22-2011
JB
Home of Natcore's new lab ...
http://eastmanbusinesspark.com/
Check out the 2 minute video.
JB
Email from Natcore.
I am relieved now that Natcore has decided where to locate their new lab. I've been hoping that they would have their lab open in time to take delivery of the Intelligent Processing system.
PR: Natcore Technology to Locate Solar Research Center in Kodak's Business Park
Dear Jim,
Below is a copy of the press release that was issued this morning. As you are reading it, I am in Rochester, NY with Kodak representatives and several local business and political leaders. In anticipation of our move into the space on the first of June, we are already beginning the process of equipment needs, staffing and preparation for our Intelligent Processing System to be delivered to Kodak in just a few short weeks.
As always, I would be anxious to speak to discuss any questions or comments you might have.
Best,
Chuck
Natcore Technology to Locate
Solar Research Center in Kodak’s Business Park
Red Bank, NJ — (April 21, 2011) —After a four-month search, Natcore Technology Inc. (TSX-V: NXT; NTCXF.PK) has decided to establish the Natcore Research and Development Center at Eastman Business Park in Rochester, NY. The Rochester location was selected over several other finalists throughout the country.
Natcore currently conducts its research at three locations: Ohio State University, Rice University, and its joint venture in China. That work will now be consolidated in Rochester, although Natcore will continue its funded joint research program with the Barron Group at Rice. The R&D Center will enable Natcore to accelerate its development of thin-film solar cells and tandem solar cells using the company’s proprietary liquid phase deposition (LPD) technology. The thin-film cells could halve the cost of producing solar energy. The super-efficient tandem cells could double the power output of today’s most efficient commercial solar cells.
The Natcore Research and Development Center will be staffed initially by eight people. Dr. Dennis Flood, Natcore’s Chief Technology Officer, will soon begin to interview chemists and chemical engineers, electrical engineers, materials scientists, and technicians to fill those jobs.
Natcore signed a lease yesterday for dedicated office and laboratory facilities that will comprise two equipped labs, a clean room and administration offices. It will also house the first production model of Natcore’s intelligent LPD processing station for growing an antireflective (AR) coating on silicon wafers in the process of manufacturing solar cells. The Natcore Center will be located in Building #82 of the Kodak Research Laboratories at Eastman Business Park. Natcore is funding the Center with the proceeds of a December 2010 private placement.
Natcore continues its search for a site and partners to research, develop and manufacture thin-film solar cells using the company’s proprietary LPD process. Eastman Business Park is being considered for that facility, as are Chinese and other foreign alternatives. Like Eastman, all have considerable history in the manufacturing of roll-to-roll photo film. The final decision in this case will rest on the availability of funding.
Congresswoman Louise Slaughter has been instrumental in attracting the research facility to Rochester. Mrs. Slaughter has arranged a meeting today at which city, county and state officials and business leaders will work with Natcore to assess possible programs to help fund the development of a manufacturing operation at Eastman Business Park. As an alternative, Natcore may seek financing from joint venture partners.
“We chose Rochester for several reasons,” said Natcore President and CEO Chuck Provini. “It will give us access to Kodak’s considerable prowess in thin-film technology and much of the infrastructure we will require. In addition, we can tap expertise at Rochester’s distinguished universities. And then there was the persistence of Mrs. Slaughter and Mike Alt, who were invaluable partners in our efforts.” Mr. Alt is Director of Eastman Business Park.
“We are certainly pleased with Natcore’s decision to locate its R&D Center at Eastman Business Park, said Alt. “Our site is a good fit for Natcore from a technology and infrastructure perspective.”
"I’m delighted to know that after months of negotiations, Natcore has decided to bring their Research and Development Center to Eastman Business Park," said Mrs. Slaughter. "I am happy to do everything I can to assist in this partnership and hope this is just the beginning of green jobs coming to Rochester."
# # # # #
JB
Installing solar projects on brownfields video.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/video/installing-solar-projects-on-brownfields
JB
domasselin, I'm happy to see the 80% revenue estimate increase as well. However, it's my belief that Natcore is still being very conservative with the revenue estimate for two reasons.
1) While seeking to establish trust, it makes no sense for them to over promise and under deliver.
2) Natcore won't know exactly how much thinner the silicon wafer can be until a production line is in operation. The wafer will be as thin as possible without breaking while being handled by the production line robots.
I also like the part where he states that every 10% of market shares for AR is worth 45 Millions (instead of 25M$ as stated in the 2010 presentation).. The solar demand is growing fast!
JB
Article on flexible panels. Huge market. This seems to be where Natcore's roll to roll flexible thin film panels will compete.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/03/flexible-cigs-pv-a-new-show-coming-soon-to-a-rooftop-near-you
There has been a recent upsurge in developments for building-integrated phototovoltaics (BiPV) roof top materials based on CIGS. Several new companies have increased their presence and are looking to bring products to market for this application in 2011. For roof-top application, there are significant key requirements beyond just having good conversion efficiency. Other attributes include lightweight, as well as moisture-proof, and fully functionally reliable. The companies bringing these new BiPV products need to ensure functionality with a rigorous series of tests, and have an extensive set of "torture" tests to validate the capability. There is a convergence of form, aesthetics, and physics to ensure that the CIGS BiPV deliver on their promises. This article will cover the developments in this segment of the BiPV market and delve into the specific tests and measurements needed to characterize the products.
Flexible CIGS thin-film rooftop laminates have the potential for becoming a major application in the maturing PV market.
The most familiar view of solar power is the PV panel tilted into the sun. Very recently there has been a strong surge of new incarnations of PV that are showing promise to change that iconic view for residential and commercial rooftops. In particular, there have been recent announcements and products such as flexible PV rolls that can be applied to rooftops and have a low profile and are more aesthetic in appearance. The technology and market for this application of flexible substrates has been a long time in the making and certainly the leader - UniSolar - has been key in developing this particular segment. Now with the advent of higher efficiency thin films, in particular CIGS, this application appears poised to become a significant part of the overall solar PV picture show.
Because flex PV modules are part of the roof membrane, they are required to endure weathering elements. To demonstrate the product capability, they must pass a series of "torture tests" showing that they can withstand a barrage of temperature, humidity, and mechanical extremes, and do so for 25 years. A number of suppliers along with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory have been working to demonstrate the necessary reliability [1-5]. Dr. Rommel Noufi of NREL states that "reliability testing at both the cell and module level are key points of focus at NREL, and there is extensive activity for this, especially with CIGS." [6].
Because encapsulation coatings are used instead of glass, resistance to moisture ingress and UV degradation are the primary concerns. Since lightweight modules utilize flexible cells, this configuration leads to additional failure modes specific to flexible substrates.
The "back story" on flex panels
There are now several companies targeting the commercial and industrial flat-roof market with a lightweight, non-penetrating flexible solar module element.These "panels" can be rolled up, laid out across rooftops with minimal effort, and walked upon. Another appealing aspect is that they can provide full coverage of the roof by accommodating steps in the roof surface, and other protrusions that dot the tops. Architects want four key attributes: good conversion efficiency, light weight, good aesthetics, and reasonable cost. With the recent developments from various CIGS companies targeting this sector, architects will be getting what they want.
Uni-Solar was first in the market, but stepping into the mix are companies such as SoloPower, Global Solar and Ascent Solar (see Table). However here is the conundrum: Uni-Solar has established its market presence with recognized reliability from years of activity. The newcomers have a burden of proof to demonstrate reliability. The testing helps with the proof of reliability and establishes the credentials
The recent opening of this market is due to two key elements. As succinctly stated by Jean-Noel Poirier, VP of Business Development at Global Solar, these elements are: "1) CIGS cell technology is now reaching high efficiency, at production scale; and 2) Encapsulation technologies and materials are now available allowing packaging the CIGS cells into flexible modules." The company insures reliability via material specifications from large chemical manufacturers (vapor barriers, etc.) and from tough accelerated testing, which allows the company to warranty power output for 25 years [7].
Weathering or accelerated lifetime testing
The main difference with the flex PV is that instead of glass, a polymer coating is used. Especially for CIGS, the critical concern is moisture-induced degradation. The path to demonstrating its viability as a rooftop flexible product comes down to the various "torture tests" and to collecting data - lots of data. In the short term enough reliability data must be obtained to get into the market and a track record established.
The main tests are similar to those of standard glass-based PV and are based on accelerated stress exposures under extreme conditions. The principal tests are:
•Damp heat 85°C/85% RH (DH) and modified DH with acetic acid vapor; and
•Humidity freeze and accelerated temperature cycle testing (-40°C /90°C).
Additional tests specific to the flex PV include:
•Adhesion testing,
•UV exposure, and
•Flexibility tolerance.
The main certifications include: IEC 61646 and UL 61730.
Key CIGS-related stress testing
CIGS structures are built out of several critical layers using various fabrication methods. Manufacturing deviations and deposition method limitations can result in imperfections that cause cell and module performance deterioration.
Table. Comparison of different PV technologies.
The first problem that is encountered in the fabrication of CIGS solar cells is the preparation of a Mo layer due to the large thermal and lattice mismatch between Mo, the substrate, and between the CIGS material and Mo. Similarly, Ag-front grid lines over the top TCO layer also can be adversely affected by the thermocycling, which causes deterioration of the material.
Other factors that can affect flexible CIGS performance include:
Cu diffusion through the junction irreversibly damaging the cell: The necessity to avoid the formation of an unstable CuxSe phase at the surface is addressed by process optimization.
Deviation from the right stoichiometry in some zones of the absorber layer: This phenomenon is more pronounced in large area size products over time that can negatively influence working cells' energy output. The metastable effects in CIGS-based thin-film solar cells are responsible for long-term stability under illumination at elevated temperature. Accumulation of negative charges at the heterointerface due to the net doping density variations leads to a change of the fill factor and VOC (the cell's open circuit voltage). The position of quasi Fermi levels in the space charge region is to blame for the light soak effect in CIGS cells.
Moisture ingress that is prominent due to the granular structure of the multilayer film stack of the cell: this leads to the substantial changes in sheet and shunt resistance lowering power conversion efficiency of the device.
Figure 1. Novel moisture barrier. SOURCES: DuPont and University of Delaware [8]
UV-degradation of encapsulating layer: this contributes to the overall degree of moisture intake.
The flexible encapsulating layer plays a major role, and is the subject of numerous cycling tests. Representative data showing an approach using ALD is shown in Fig. 1 from DuPont and the University of Delaware [8], and other work is ongoing [9,10].
UV damage to the organic material is an obvious concern, therefore, the encapsulating and bonding materials used in flexible CIGS modules are tested in various UV and sunlight irradiation to verify their stability to bimodal failure type. The probability of disintegration of commonly used polymers is tested under combined alternation of UV-DH exposure and the results indicate the likelihood of a lifetime of 25 years.
Transmission spectra are often measured by using broadband spectrophotometry for samples exposed to UVB fluorescent lamps for three weeks in an arrangement that complies with IEC 61646. The dosages are calculated to be equivalent to 15kW-hr/m2 in wavelengths between 280 and 385nm, and 5kW-hr/m2 in wavelengths between 280 and 320nm, respectively.
Representative data elements for flex PV products
There is a clear recognition by flex PV suppliers that they need to solidly demonstrate the reliability of their products. Dr. Mustafa Pinarbasi of SoloPower affirms this need and has developed testing procedures to exceed the standard test requirements. The company's data is representative of the high level of testing to ensure reliability.
Figure 2. Damp heat test of flexible modules for normalized Pmax. SOURCE: SoloPower
Damp heat is critical and SoloPower's tests conducted on product modules showed no significant change in power even beyond the 1000 hours standard as shown in Fig. 2. These panels were previously exposed to 1 week of outdoor light exposure and 10 humidity/freeze cycles (-40°C to 85°C) prior to damp heat exposure. Flexible panels were also subjected to temperature cycle testing (-40°C /90°C). Results shown in Fig. 3 demonstrate that very small or no power degradation is observed after 550 cycles.
In addition, a mechanical flexibility test was developed to determine the reliability of the modules. The test equipment coils and uncoils the panels over a 20-inch diameter drum. Each cycle of the mechanical test consists of coiling and uncoiling the panel both under tensile and compressive stress conditions. For installation, 25 coiling steps are needed. Figure 4 shows that even after 300 cycles of testing, no significant change in power is measured. With this data, SoloPower is able to address and mitigate concerns about product capability.
Figure 3. Temperature cycle test of rigid panels at -40°C / 90°C . SOURCE: SoloPower
A similar philosophy to not just meet, but to exceed the test a requirement is in place at Ascent solar. According to Dan Tomlinson, in the business development group, Ascent will even use an autoclave (essentially a large pressure cooker) to force the moisture issue. The company recognizes that this test is dramatically more demanding and can cause failures not actually present in the real world.
In addition, Tomlinson indicates that adhesion testing is an important point of focus to ascertain how well the modules will stick to the roof. For these pull tests, the team notes how much force is needed to pull a laminate to the point of failure.
Conclusion
There has been a significant uptick in the activity for flexible CIGS thin-film rooftop laminates in the last six months. This market has the potential for becoming a major application and this development reflects the maturing aspect of PV in that different products with application specific characteristics are evolving to meet market needs. In the case of rooftops, there are now a number of roofing companies that are partnering with PV companies to provide lightweight, flexible and aesthetic products. As Poirier says, "Roofing companies are looking for PV products that respect roofs (no penetration) and the building integrity (light weight, low wind load, aesthetics). Flexible modules perfectly answer these needs," , observes Poirier. "Furthermore, flexible modules can integrate into their own roofing products, allowing for synergetic systems and solutions. New CIGS flex modules provide the same benefits, but with higher efficiency. So the roofing industry is very excited by the arrival of high efficiency flexible modules, and is currently testing the product according to their stringent standard testing process."
Figure 4. SoloPower's mechanical flexibility test. SOURCE: SoloPower
These "torture tests" are necessary because they are the first step to provide an entry for installation. The testing mitigates concerns about field reliability. In the end, it will be the "real-world" rooftops that have been functioning for 20 years that provide the ultimate proof. In the mean time, extensive effort is being applied to demonstrate that the rooftop show (and performance) will be a feature presentation with enduring qualities and even multiple sequels.
JB
Perhaps NREL will provide some funding for Natcore.
Quote:
Natcore PR ...
Natcore Successfully Passivates "Black Silicon" Solar Cells
Breakthrough Should Result In Significant Power Gains Over Standard Production Cells 04/14 07:00 AM
Because of the great potential offered by black silicon solar cells, Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) is currently in discussions with the NREL as well as industry groups to refine and accelerate Natcore's (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) advances in this area.
http://www.nrel.gov/features/20110322_pv_incubator.html
JB
dougheuring, the Holy Grail of solar is cost parity with conventional energy.
Natcore has stated that they expect their tandem cell solar panels to achieve cost parity. This passivation process, as exlained in the PR, will improve the efficientcy of solar cells.
Any improvement in efficientcy should translate into wider acceptance and more revenue to Natcore.
Lots of good news lately.
JB
Natcore PR ...
Natcore Successfully Passivates "Black Silicon" Solar Cells
Breakthrough Should Result In Significant Power Gains Over Standard Production Cells 04/14 07:00 AM
RED BANK, NEW JERSEY--(Marketwire - April 14, 2011) - Scientists at Natcore Technology Inc. (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) have been able to demonstrate the effectiveness of its liquid phase deposition (LPD) process in passivating the surface of "black silicon" solar cells.
"Black silicon" refers to the apparent color of the surface of a silicon wafer after it has been etched with nano-scale pores. The etching takes place in a matter of a few minutes in a liquid solution at room temperature; the black color is not a color at all but results from the absence of reflected light from the porous wafer surface. Black silicon solar cells have been under intensive study for years because of their potential for significantly improved performance compared to standard production cells now available.
The reflectivity of a polished silicon wafer surface approaches 40%, giving the wafer its shiny appearance. Adding the typical solar cell industry antireflective coating reduces the average reflectivity to approximately 6% and gives the cells their distinctive dark blue color. The black silicon process, however, has been shown by Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) scientists, the Barron Group (working with Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) funding) at Rice University, and researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to reduce the average reflectivity to less than 1.5%.
A key impediment to turning a solar cell's increased light absorption into increased power output, however, is a significantly increased area of exposed silicon on the sidewalls of the pores and on the small mesas that remain at the top surface of the wafer itself. This increased area must be passivated, or treated to keep it from trapping the light-generated electric charges as they migrate toward the contacts of the solar cell, a process that robs the cell of output power.
Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) -sponsored research, conducted by Professor Andrew Barron's group in combination with research by Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) scientists working at the Ohio State University, resulted in a 20-fold increase in a parameter called minority carrier lifetime for the LPD-coated black silicon, compared to the uncoated black silicon surface. According to research by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), such a result would enable the power gains promised by using black silicon for solar cell manufacturing to actually be realized.
Passivation is the process of filling the dangling atomic bonds at the surface of the solar cell, as well as reducing the numbers of defects that always exist in the upper region of the cell body. It is critical to enabling production of long-term, high-performance silicon solar cells. In September 2010, Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) scientists announced their success in passivating standard commercial silicon solar cells on which a silica film had been grown using Natcore's (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) liquid phase deposition (LPD) process.
"It is likely that a thermal oxidation process could also accomplish the passivation of black silicon," says Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) President and CEO Chuck Provini. "But that would be costly, and it's not practical for implementation in a high-volume solar cell fabrication line. The ability of our LPD process to passivate black silicon eliminates the need for thermal oxidation. It also enables use of an all-liquid phase process for creating ultralow reflectivity, high-performance silicon solar cells at high volume production rates. That translates to lower cost than is possible with current solar cell manufacturing technology."
Because of the great potential offered by black silicon solar cells, Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) is currently in discussions with the NREL as well as industry groups to refine and accelerate Natcore's (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) advances in this area.
Statements in this press release other than purely historical factual information, including statements relating to revenues or profits, or Natcore's (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) future plans and objectives, or expected sales, cash flows, and capital expenditures constitute forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on numerous assumptions and are subject to all of the risks and uncertainties inherent in Natcore's (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) business, including risks inherent in the technology history. There can be no assurance that such forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on such statements. Except in accordance with applicable securities laws, Natcore (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements or forward-looking statements that are incorporated by reference herein.
Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:
Natcore Technology Inc. (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%) Chuck Provini
President and CEO
732-576-8800
www.natcoresolar.com
Source: Natcore Technology Inc. (NTCXF:$1.0500,$0.0000,0.00%)
Get more news on:SYMBOLS: NTCXFNEWS TYPE: SECTORS:
JB
CCME: Following receipt of the resignation letter, several conversations between management of the Company and Mr. Kung took place, including a meeting with other members of the audit committee and their counsel, which have led Mr. Kung to notify the Company that he was delaying the effectiveness of his resignation for one week to allow the Company time to address these issues.
Article written about the harmful climate change effects of shale gas wells. Encourages renewable fuels such as wind and solar.
Shale gas 'worse than coal' for climate
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13053040
Richard Black By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News
A core of shale rock Gas is a natural by-product of shale rock
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories
* UK shale plans target cheap gas
* Canada gas well blast injures 11
* IEA doubles global gas estimates
The new kid on the energy block, shale gas, may be worse in climate change terms than coal, a study concludes.
Drawn from rock through a controversial "fracking" process, some hail the gas as a "stepping stone" to a low-carbon future and a route to energy security.
But US researchers found that shale gas wells leak substantial amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
This makes its climate impact worse than conventional gas, they say - and probably worse than coal as well.
"Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20% greater and perhaps more than twice as great on the 20-year horizon, and is comparable over 100 years," they write in a paper to be published shortly in the journal Climatic Change.
"We have produced the first comprehensive analysis of the greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas," said lead author Robert Howarth from Cornell University in Ithaca, US.
"We have used the best available data [and] the conclusion is that shale gas may indeed be quite damaging to global warming, quite likely as bad or worse than coal," he told BBC News.
Short-term fix?
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
We should not proceed to view shale gas as a 'transitional fuel' to be used over the next few decades to replace other fossil fuels”
End Quote Robert Howarth Cornell University
Greenhouse gas emissions from shale gas are predominantly down to two things: carbon dioxide produced when the gas is burned, and methane that leaks out while the well is being exploited.
Figures from the US government and industry indicate that at least a third more methane leaks from shale gas extraction than from conventional wells - and perhaps more than twice as much.
Extracting the gas involves a complex sequence of processes including drilling down and then sideways along a shale bed, cracking the rock with hydraulic pressure or explosions (fracking), placing plugs in the shaft and then "drilling out" these plugs.
Coal, by contrast, is associated with a much smaller methane release during mining; but burning it produces about twice as much CO2 as burning natural gas.
Molecule for molecule, methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2; but it lasts for a much shorter time in the atmosphere.
Figures from this research team indicate that over a 20-year period, the net warming impact of using shale gas is worse than coal - and, perhaps more surprisingly, that conventional gas may be worse than coal as well.
Over a 100-year timeframe, conventional gas is almost certainly better than coal - but shale gas could be worse.
The precise numbers depend most on leakage rates. Dr Howarth's group used "best practice" estimates; in the real world, therefore, the leakage and the climate impact could be even worse.
"No-one knows for sure to what extent industry uses best practices; and unfortunately, at least in the US, industry does not want government or the public to know," he said.
Shale gas rig Some communities see shale gas as a route to local riches, as well as energy independence
"The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed rules that would require industry to report methane emissions, but several companies have sued the EPA to try to prevent such reporting."
With greenhouse gas emissions resuming their rise as societies emerge from recession, and with growth in fossil fuel use expanding at a faster absolute rate than renewables, some analysts and even climate campaigners have seized on the option of expanding gas use as a "transitional fuel" on the way from high-carbon coal-burning to low-carbon alternatives.
The new US analysis suggests this may not be a sensible strategy, given that the total carbon footprint appears bigger - especially if the gas comes from shale formations.
Current projections suggest that within 25 years, half of the US natural gas output will come from shale, while many other countries are also pursuing the technology.
The first trial fracking in the UK took place last month, in Lancashire.
Euan Nisbet, a geologist who runs several methane monitoring and research programmes from Royal Holloway, University of London, suggested the detailed balance might vary between geological formations.
"By trying to evaluate the greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas extraction, Howarth and his team are asking important questions about this new bonanza," he said.
"I suspect the debate on this will be long, and the answers will be different for each shale gas formation; but it is important that we tackle this debate."
"We also need to be very careful to account fully for the greenhouse footprint of conventional gas piped over long distances, for instance in the import of Asian gas to Europe, or Norwegian gas to the UK. The energy choices are not easy."
The UK Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is preparing to issue more fracking licences around the country, and a spokesman said it would "closely monitor developments and consider the need for additional research to improve our understanding of the implications for policy".
Robert Howarth, however, was less equivocal.
"We should not proceed to view shale gas as a 'transitional fuel' to be used over the next few decades to replace other fossil fuels, but rather work harder to move towards truly green renewable fuels as quickly as possible, such as wind and solar."
JB
First time Natcore has mentioned Phono Solar, interesting. Phono Solar calls themselves one of the world's largest.
Quote:
The newest patent, which is solely owned by Natcore, describes the use of inorganic semiconductor-coated nanotubes to make high-efficiency thin-film solar cells. Natcore is currently in talks with Eastman Kodak and with Phono Solar of China to commercialize this new technology on equipment that was used to manufacture photo film until that market weakened with the growth of digital photography.
http://www.phonosolar.com/
http://www.enf.cn/pv/5998c.html
JB
Nice to be updated on Natcore's developments.
I was happy to hear that progress is being made with regards to the tandem cell. I hope the new lab is open soon.
JB
Negative article on wind power.
"It is clear from this analysis that wind cannot be relied upon to provide any significant level of generation at any defined time in the future. There is an urgent need to re-evaluate the implications of reliance on wind for any significant proportion of our energy requirement."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/262713-wind-power-investors-get-another-reality-check?source=email_alternative_energy_investing
JB
HeHe, great analogy futr!
I'm happy to see that GE's technology is based on environmentally unfriendly cadmium telluride. Same, or similar, product as First Solar.
Natcore's future competing product from Company PR ...
Vanguard has been focused on the development of a flexible, thin-film photovoltaic material capable of silicon solar cell-like efficiency performance potentially at one tenth the manufacturing cost and one twentieth the capital investment.
Vanguard employs a proprietary chemical bath process similar to Natcore’s liquid phase deposition (LPD) technology, although Vanguard is growing II-VI compound semiconductor thin films on carbon nanotubes at room temperature and ambient pressure, while Natcore has thus far concentrated on growing silicon dioxide films on silicon substrates.
The first-generation products from Vanguard’s method could produce 15%-16% efficiencies at module costs of 60¢ to 70¢ per watt. It is anticipated that second-generation technology could achieve 20% efficiencies at even lower costs per watt. The investment for production facilities is projected as low as $10 million to $15 million per 100-megawatt to 150-megawatt production capability, as compared with current costs of as much as $250 million for standard solar-cell production facilities. Vanguard’s production equipment would be designed for insertion into an existing roll-to-roll film-coating line of the sort that has been displaced by the emergence of digital photography. All production materials are widely available and dramatically cheaper than silicon and other thin film systems. If successfully developed, the process would enable a very cost-efficient production capability in large-scale facilities.
I like "David's" chances here.
I look forward to Natcore's roll to roll product.
JB
DOE's SunShot Initiative
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/solar/newsletter/detail.cfm/articleId=96
JB
Email reply from Natcore below along with my email.
Natcore's projection of $5 of revenue per panel from the LPD process, found in the 2010 power point, has always seemed very conservative to me. I demonstrated that with a 60% reduction in the amount of silicon used, Natcore would save the solar manufacturer $184 using recent polysilicon prices. Their reply has me thinking that we could have much larger revenues per panel.
The benefit of the large silicon cost savings to Natcore/China is hard to gage. I think 33% to N/C and 66% to the panel manufacturer would seem fair. Let's call it $61 from silicon savings and $5 from the LPD process = $66 per panel of revenue for N/C.
Natcore's PR tells us that TLNZ Solar will expand their production to 200MW in their huge facility. 200MW divided by 180W (the stated average panel wattage from the power point) = 1.1 million panels per year.
1.1 million panels x $66 = $72.6 million per year of revenue to N/C from just one customer.
Now, I have no idea of what the actual silicon savings benefit will be to N/C, but it could be huge. Also, Natcore has stated that the amount of silicon used in panels incorporating the LPD process may be reduced by 66% instead of the 60% I used. Let us hope we see this kind of huge revenue from every customer.
Dear Chuck,
The latest news is certainly very positive!
Having TLNZ Solar, with it's knowledge of LPD, possibly coming onboard is very exciting. Also, reading the MicroTech Systems CEO's statement of a " paradigm shift" is fantastic.
As an individual that is extremely hopeful that Natcore can deliver inexpense alternative energy for the benefit of the entire world, I congratulate you and the entire Natcore team for your accomplishments to date.
Is there a person or agency that I can contact in order to express my backing for keeping Natcore's roll to roll technology and manufacturing in the US?
One more question. This article speaks to higher silicon prices expected for some time; http://www.pennenergy.com/index/power/display/2629532885/articles/Photovoltaics-World/silicon-photovoltaics/crystalline-silicon/2011/3/polysilicon-in_china.html. My calculations suggest that silicon solar manufacturers can currently save over $184 per panel in silicon costs by utilizing Natcore's LPD process. However, the Simplified Revenue Model For AR Film Application from the October, 2010 powerpoint makes no mention of how much the silicon savings will benefit Natcore.
kg/watt of silicon for typical solar panel ... .015
180 watts per typical solar panel ... x 180
= 2.7 kg for average 180 watt panel
current spot price for polysilicon ... x $114 US per kg
= $307.80 cost per panel for polysilicon
LPD requires 60% less silicon .............. x .60
= $184.68 silicon cost savings per panel using Natcore's LPD process
Chuck, please review and reply to above.
Thanks in advance, Jim xxxx
Thanks for the e-mail and your continued support of Natcore.
As far as contacting people is concerned, your local Congressmen and Senators is a good start. Congresswoman Louise Slaughter from Rochester, NY is also someone who has been very supportive of us and is working very hard at keeping our technology here in the US. The DOE is the agency involved in trying to find us some support here but in all honesty I wouldn’t expect much from anyone there.
You are correct that the price of silicon is important in the manufacturing of solar panels and the savings in using our process is substantial. Lately, Chuck have been giving presentations to brokers here in the Northeast. In the power point presentation we are using for these presentations we do mention the cost savings involved in our process.
If you have any other questions, let me know.
Regards,
Thomas J. Scarpa
Senior Vice President
We may be in for some very nice revenue pre-tandem cell.
JB
CCME asked for the halt, when announcing that DTT resigned, in order to protect the share price, I think. I still think that they will try to remain listed on the Nasdaq. We'll know soon enough.
JB
Once the paradigm shift caused by Natcore's disruptive technology begins, we need recognition similar to Acme Packet. They have TTM earnings of .63 and a share price of $71. Trailing pe of 112. All do to a better mouse trap. Go Natcore!
JB
westeffer, I share your optimism.
I originally bought due to Natcore's impressive management team and founders. I believed what they were saying regarding Natcore's future. Recently, managements claims of disruptive products has been echoed by MicroTech's CEO's statement regarding his belief of a "paradigm shift in driving the cost of solar manufacturing".
It appears that Natcore is on the verge of being incorporated into Hunan TLNZ Solar's manufacturing lines. This development gives me confidence that the solar manufacturers will adopt Natcore's products.
The demand for solar is strong, and gaining strength everyday it seems. All we need is patience, imo.
JB
Huge news regarding China possibly doubling PV industry capacity!
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/China-mulls-to-switch-over-to-solar-photovoltaics-to-scale-down-N-power/articleshow/7825292.cms
BEIJING: China is seriously considering to down size its massive expansion plan of nuclear plants in view of radiation crisis created by ruptured Japanese nuclear reactors and weighed option to double the target capacity of solar photovoltaics (PV) to meet future power requirements.
China, world's largest PV producer, is seriously considering to increase the five year target for PV industry capacity from five gigawatts (GW) to 10 GW, state-run Xinhua quoted Shi Lishan, deputy director of the renewable energy department of the National Energy Administration (NEA) as saying on Wednesday.
China's PV production hit about 4000 MW last year, with majority of products sold overseas.
Shi's comments came amid reports that China may fine tune its nuclear power development plan as the nuclear leak crisis in Japan has triggered security concerns.
The revision is very likely to be approved although it is still under discussion, given the backdrop of Japan's nuclear crisis, Wednesday issue of the state-run China Securities Journal reported.
China at present has 13 nuclear reactors and approved construction of 10 more mega nuclear reactors in addition to 25 currently being built to step up its nuclear power generation capacity to 86 GW by 2020 with a massive investment of $121.5 billion.
According to China Nuclear Energy Association, China plans to build more than 60 reactors by 2020 by that time nuclear power will account for five per cent of the 15 per cent power generation from renewable sources.
But now China plans scale back its nuclear power projection to around three per cent, Sun Qin, the head of the China's nuclear plant operator, China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC) said.
Qin said there will be no changes in its plans to build more plants due Japanese radiation crisis, though safety standards will be beefed up.
On March 16, Chinese Cabinet decided to halt new approvals of nuclear projects following crisis at Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant.
After this, China's National Nuclear Safety Administration ordered existing facilities to begin safety checks.
JB
From Stockhouse board. I believe that this poster had asked Natcore if the panels produced using LPD would have to go through lengthy field testing.
just heard back from Natcore and looks like all Hunan has to do is run a couple of batches and if satisfactory, start producing the panels using the LPD machine...looks like some $$ coming in soon.
JB
Go Green ... Angela Merkel humiliated by Green Party in Baden-Wuerttemberg election.
German chancellor Angela Merkel was dealt a humiliating blow after losing out to the Green Party through panic over nuclear power.
For Mrs Merkel, a native of Hamburg, the loss came as a 'very painful' blow Photo: REUTERSBy Matthew Day, Warsaw 5:15PM BST 28 Mar 2011
Mrs Merkel's ruling Christian Democratic Union lost out in a vital election in the prosperous southwestern region of Baden-Wuerttemberg, where her party had ruled for nearly 60 years.
Germany's Green Party looks set to have its first state premier following the election, seen as a referendum on the country's nuclear energy policy.
"It's a deep wound in the history of Baden-Wuerttemberg and also in the history of the CDU," Mrs Merkel said.
"The pain from this loss won't go away in just one day. We'll have to work for a long time to overcome the pain from this defeat."
The Greens doubled their share of the vote as they rose to 24.4 per cent in elections, in the traditionally conservative state.
As the dust settled after Sunday's election the Greens prepared to go into government with the left-wing Social Democrats, and, as the bigger of the two parties, they should appoint the premier.
"We've achieved a historic election victory," said a jubilant Winfried Kretschmann, who is likely to become the Green's first state premier. "I'd like to thank those that voted for us – especially those voting for us for the first time."
For Mrs Merkel, the loss of the state and a bastion of Christian Democrat power came as a "very painful" blow, and one that she attributed it to the Japanese nuclear disaster.
"The debate in connection with the Japanese nuclear plant of Fukushima was clearly what led to our defeat. My view of atomic energy has changed since the events in Japan," she continued, but added that she had no plans to reshuffle her cabinet.
The chancellor had come under fire for a sudden U-turn on nuclear energy in the lead up to the election. Reversing a decision she made last year to prolong the lifespans of the country's reactors Mrs Merkel had also announced that seven of the oldest reactors would shut down pending a safety review.
But critics accused the chancellor of electioneering: a view, it appears, shared with the electorate of Baden-Wurttemberg.
Reacting to the result, Norbert Roettgen, Germany's environment minister, said that it showed Germans want a faster exit from nuclear energy, which generates 23 per cent of the country's electricity, but is opposed, according to polls, by up to 80 per cent of the population.
"We have to now show that we can get away from nuclear energy faster and that the switch to renewable energy is possible," said Mr Roettgen.
The embarrassing defeat for Mrs Merkel, which came after a mauling in the Hamburg elections in February, prompted speculation that her grip on the Christian Democrats might weaken.
But while her reputation has suffered, Mrs Merkel, who will not face a federal election until 2013, is expected to weather the defeat without a challenge to her leadership – in part because she has no major rivals left within her party.
JB