
An outdated idea about solar panels has been slowing advancement: study - xbmcuser
https://www.inverse.com/article/59404-solar-panel-replacement
======
ASalazarMX
Alternative title: "Why don't we make solar panels last 10-15 years instead of
20-25?"

How about no. The technology improves in very small increments, there's no
need to replace panels for a 3-5% gain. This smells of wanting programmed
obsolescence because the current growth rate will stabilize in the future.

------
thefj
_In recent years, the price of solar panel technology has been driven down,
but the cost of labor and installation hasn’t. As the framework technologies
go out of date within a 25-year period, individuals and companies are facing
larger costs when they are required replace both the framework system and the
panels themselves every 25-30 years in order to install entirely new systems.

In contrast, the authors write that replacing panels more often with newer and
more advanced models would allow cross-compatibility between the panels and
the system, allowing the framework itself to remain the same while new panels
are popped on and off._

So even though the installation and replacement labor is what's expensive,
they assume that some kind of cross compatibility will appear, and it will be
cheaper? Seems like quite a leap.

------
agoodthrowaway
The cost of installation is why I don’t have solar. While I agree 25 year life
is a limitation on adopting better panel technology, it’s hard to justify the
installation costs at shorter intervals.

------
robotron
Terrible mobile site.

------
Spooky23
In the HN hive mind, this makes solar even more deadly. With installers
falling off of roofs at a faster interval, the death rate per gigawatt will
grow.

