On 11.03.19 09:19, Gregg Eshelman via Emc-users wrote: > This guy in Australia tested a cheap $90 100 watt panel and one that > cost a lot more. The $90 panel significantly out performed the > expensive panel.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-sc4rlV93g Commenters > noted that the cheap panel is using PV cells of the newest technology, > with all contacts on the back side and a matte finish so there's zero > obstruction to light and the non-glossy surface reflects less light. > The expensive panel has older style cells with buss bars across the > front and a super glossy surface.
The new technology is reported to be a little bit more efficient, but panel durability is what taste is to beer, I figure. Before putting panels on my roof (once it's up) I'll be checking: https://www.solarquotes.com.au/solar101.html which depicts a bunch of brands on a cost spectrum after the intro bumpf. (Then covers inverters and racking.) http://www.solaraccreditation.com.au/products/modules/building-approved-modules.html and maybe here: https://www.solarquotes.com.au/panels/comparison/compare-solar-panels/ Hmmm, A$0.67/watt is about US$0.47/watt. Its efficiency is lower than the expensive ones, but with cheap racking and a big roof ... OTOH, I'd scroll right and choose a longer warranty which includes labour for panel replacement. (scroll down too) Checking thermal derating could also be worthwhile, as the common 0.5%/°C loss of output power will lose around 22.5% of your 250 or 310W, or whatever the wallet stretches to, on a 45°C day when the panels are at 70°C. Hmmm, they're all pretty much the same at the last link, above. The panels can last 25 years, the inverter and battery about 10. It's handy to not be forking out for a whole new system at that point. Erik _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
