Home made solar cells - is this real?

I don't think you did. You found a link to someone selling a copy of a patent. Screen printing may be easy. This does not mean that obtaining the complex chemicals needed to screen print a solar cell will be easy. I suspect that the patent probably won't specify the exact chemicals either, as they haven't got it working. Not to mention that it's actually illegal to build one for your own use while the patent is in force. (you are infringing hte patent by using it, even though you don't sell it)

If he's in the US, builds a one off for himself and doesnt sell it or commercially profit from it, its questionable if he violated anything.

Steve Roberts

I wouldn't bother with the Solar cells if I were you since they only work if the sun is shining - on the same website they have plans for the 'Fuelless engine' which apparently provides unlimited free energy. This looks like a much better way to waste $16.95 to me.

Michael Kellett

AIUI - it's 'for gain'. He gains by using a solar cell where he would otherwise need to buy one. It's been a while since I looked at the relevant US statute though.

Yes its for commercial use. Anyhow theres no point in using it because it is patented.

I'm trying to procure solar cells from a manufacturer. Most say there is huge demand and low supply and most are booked for a long time.

Mike

Ian Stirl> > If he's in the US, builds a one off for himself and doesnt sell it or

There *were* plans floating around to make your own copper / copper oxide solar cell from home, but a 2-inch square can only produce millivolts / milliamps.

Plans involved polishing a sheet of copper, and firing a propane blowtorch at one side to oxidize it. Then, coil a long thin strip of wire across the red copper oxide layer, and secure in place somehow... don't remember the details. I *think* this wire provided (+), and the copper back of the solar cell was (-).

Here's a variation on the idea:

Produces only microamps though... pity.

The "in situ" solar cell process has long been available.

See

Not at all. You can steal anything patented you want to at any time provided it is for your educational self-gratification or for research.

Patent law specifically exempts such uses.

Patent law specifically excludes personal use for educational or research purposes.

What possible use could you have for a solar cell?

NOT ONE NET WATTHOUR OF CONVENTIONAL SILICON PV ELECTRICITY HAS ---> EVER

The problem is efficiency.

Any pv system under six percent efficient will NEVER pay for itself because the incoming energy gets waaaay too diffuse.

For research, or education, yes. In order to use it, and avoiding buying one, no.

Gee. Do you feel strongly about this?

I assume that by 'net watt-hour' you mean after the energy necessary to produce the cells and associated electronics. I suspect that in many cases you are correct. I also suspect, however, that PV cells in remote locations do, in fact, "generate" a net positive amount of energy, if you were to factor in the energy necessary to produce, install and maintain mains wiring to the top of the mountain or whatever.

But I have no idea of how remote makes it "remote enough".

I cut the top off a 2N3055 transistor and from 12" shone a 60W bench light on the now exposed silicon chip. Maximum 110uA photo current came with an ammeter across the Collector and the Emitter connections. (20% less current if across the base-emitter) A 7k ohm load gave about 0.35V at 50uA. This is 17uW. Not bad!. Increased the light collecting area by holding a X12 jewellers Loupe 1/2" above the junction. Sadly, power output only improved to 70uW. Disregarding the few watt-seconds needed to cut the top off the transistor, my return on investment was a remarkable 100%. (the 2N3055 had been given to me :) john

A country mile is not nearly enough.

See

You sound like you need to get into your time machine and join the guy in 1889 who wanted to close the patent office because everything that could possibly ever be invented had been.

Thanks, Rich

Hey, I'm doing research, and being educated {in spades!] even as we "speak"!

Cheers! Rich

I have no problem with legitimate alternate energy developments.

I do have problems with those based on an outright lie (such as net energy sink conventional silicon pv panels).

And with individuals who refuse to accept that there is a fundamental thermodynamic reason involving exergy why electrolysis for bulk hydrogen energy flat out ain't gonna happen.

As per

New CIGS pv developments MIGHT get us as much as ONE THIRD of the way towards net energy renewability and sustainability. But further dinking with spread or multiple workfunctions plus increased efficiency will be needed to get within shouting distance.

My own positive energy contributions appear at

I am, of course, emphatically in favor of closing the patent office. This should have been done a long time ago.