31 Mar 2009
Many solar panels are made using "spectacularly inefficient" manufacturing techniques that could undermine their environmental benefits, according to new research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
The study, released last week, found that many of the cutting edge processes used to make computer chips, solar cells and nanomaterials use an "alarming" amount of energy compared to established manufacturing techniques.
While many of the manufacturing techniques used by heavy industries have been widely criticised by environmentalists for their inefficiency, the MIT study found that new manufacturing systems are anywhere from 1,000 to one million times bigger consumers of energy, per pound of output, than more traditional industries.
The study cites the fast-expanding solar industry as a prime example of a modern manufacturing sector where a focus on price and quality has led to energy efficiency being ignored.
It warns that "the inherent inefficiency of current solar panel manufacturing methods could drastically reduce the technology's lifecycle energy balance - that is, the ratio of the energy the panel would produce over its useful lifetime to the energy required to manufacture it".
The report also warned that energy use across the solar sector could increase still further as manufacturers began to deploy so-called vapour-phase processing, which relies on the creation of vacuum chambers during solar cell manufacture. The method is less energy efficient than liquid-phase processing that deposits coating onto semiconductors using a liquid solution.
Professor Timothy Gutowski of MIT's department of mechanical engineering, who led the research, said that there was an urgent need for modern manufacturing industries to increase their focus on energy efficiency or risk seeing their environmental claims undermined.
"The seemingly extravagant use of materials and energy resources by many newer manufacturing processes is alarming and needs to be addressed alongside claims of improved sustainability from products manufactured by these means," he warned.
Gutowski added that the study's figures were likely to be conservative as his team did not assess the energy required to make the raw materials or maintain the environment of the plant, such as the air conditioning and filtration for clean rooms used in semiconductor processing.
He concluded that many of the manufacturing processes could be improved and made more energy efficient, but only if modern manufacturing industries realised the "significant energy cost".
The study follows the launch of a campaign earlier this year urging the solar industry to act early to address concerns over some of the toxic components found in solar panels.
LATEST STORIES ABOUT TECHNOLOGY
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
LATEST JOBS
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
HIGHLIGHT
Companies must be more open about which groups they fund and why, say green marketing experts
INSIGHT
INSIGHT
The science and practical application of an improved method for the specification of power and cooling infrastructure for data centres
A look at alternative approaches to managing energy for cost and/or sustainability reasons in data centres
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comment
Is "cost per pound" the right metric?
The MIT study focused on the energy cost per pound of material used. As the solar industry is trying to reduce the amount of material in panels to improve the energy balance I would think that this metric would give a false comparison. The energy out vs the energy in seems to be the only reasonable metric and regular silicon solar panels produce enough energy in 3-4 years to match the energy used to make them, and that is improving with time. Who funded the MIT study?
Posted by Van Rudd, 19 Feb 2010
A commonsense approach to reducing greenhouse gases in manufacturing solar panels.
A reasonable percentage of manufactured solar panels should be deployed every month or so to provide the energy for their manufacture. A sizeable number should be deployed in the beginning and they should pay for themselves in a resonable time.
Posted by Alexandra Rodda, 25 Oct 2009
I second Gary D's comment
I agree, a good deal of reporting on green issues seems to be inaccurate, over-simplified. More depth would be appreciated. There're a lot of misconceptions out there.
Posted by Alex Horn, Wind & Solar Energy Consultant, 01 Apr 2009
Discern different technologies
Thin film amorphous silicon solar cells are highly efficient in energy consumption versus energy produced. It is also non-toxic. Discern the different technologies. Please be responsible in your reporting ? it is unfair to paint a broad picture that the PV industry is irresponsible with regard to being ?green? in energy and environment.
Posted by Gary D, 31 Mar 2009