What premium for Sanyo?

[hiccup]

Hi all

I'm just about to decide on which PV supplier and system to go for 

Question is: How much extra is the Sanyo system worth. 


Under consideration at the moment are the Suntech STP245S-20/Wd (or maybe 250) and the Sanyo HIT-H250E01.

Both systems would be 16 panels on a SSE roof at 22 degree pitch with minimal shading - no issue with space, feeding an SB4000TL

How much more output will I get from the Sanyos compared to the Suntechs?

Many Thanks

Hic!

[rogeriko]

A 250 watt panel is a 250 watt panel why spend the extra money? For some reason Sanyo's have become fashionable just like Adidas and Nike!! Sounds to me more like installer profit than increased output. Did you see my thread on panel output http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php/topic,15174.msg169907.html#msg169907 This is one of the cheapest panels on the market, I paid 320 euros, and here it is under ideal conditions producing 1 amp more than the specifications.

[hiccup]

Hi Rogeriko


It would seem that not all "250W" panels are the same. Sure at STC they all have to produce at least 250W, but how often do the panels experience STC - especially in the UK.

The Sanyos are rumoured to tend towards the +10% output tolerance, have a lower TC so more output at high temperature, and produce more at NOCT.

The question is though, how do they perform in practice.



I've looked on PVOUTPUT and bdpv but so far have not really found anything to compare against.



Hic!

[langstroth3]

Of interest - temperature induced reduction in output, based on manufacturers figures for Power coefficient %/c (hopefully I got the calcs correct!):

[supremetwo]

I've looked on PVOUTPUT and bdpv but so far have not really found anything to compare against.

http://www.navitron.org.uk/forum/index.php/topic,14326.msg160408.html#msg160408

I am also in touch with Jonathan Leloux, one of the researchers associated with BDPV and here is a paper (pdf) analysing 10,000 systems in France and Belgium.

http://www.solarweb.be/Documentation/Publications/10000_PV_Systems_France_Belgium_Hamburg2011_Paper.pdf
A brief analysis by PV modules technology has lead to relevant observations about two technologies in particular.

On the one hand, the PV systems equipped with Heterojunction with Intrinsic Thin layer (HIT) modules show performances higher than average.
 
On the other hand, the systems equipped with Copper  Indium  (di)Selenide  (CIS) modules  show a  real power  that is 16% lower than their nominal value.

All, please consider that BDPV is European based, whereas PVOUTPUT is antipodean. I am not aware of any similar research at PVOUTPUT.

Data is thus much more relevant to the UK via BDPV.

Updated comparison graph:-

[brackwell]

It may be true that Sanyo panels produce more at elevated temps with a coefficient of 0.3%/C but a lower coeff is available from Cd/Te or CIGS panels and a fraction of the cost. So if you have the space this is my choice.

Ken

[billi]

Hi  

you can compare here as well

http://www.solar-yield.eu/plant/search

If you open the "free comparison search  " and type Sanyo and Panel HIT   in you should find about 123  Sanyo Hit installs in Europe  and compare the performance  (click on the installs to see individual results not all of them  update their data  )

Billi

[defiler]

I went Sanyo, and paid the premium.  If I had the space to play with I'd have gone Yingli and saved a packet.

My reason for buying Sanyo is that the panels are smaller for the same power output.  So I got a 14-panel system where otherwise I was looking at 11.  The extra 3 panels will definitely add up over time - that's about 720W extra I can push out.

People with lots of space buying Sanyo are just wasting their money, IMO.

[AidyB]

I generally think that Sanyo are about 5-7% better than standard monocrystalline.

It's not just on the temperature coefficient, it's more to do with a wider band of light generating electricity.

AB

[RobertReadman]

I went with the Sanyo's latest and post efficient panel, the HIT-N240SE10, selected because all other panel options meant a much smaller system.

As for cost, well my 3.6kW system hits the inverter max at 4.07kWh in full sun (SMA 4000TL), +14% positive tolerance, and they work great it low light conditions.
So at £435 a panel, yes very pricey...

Sharp NU-R250J5's would be my second choice, (google shopping reports £325 per panel)

A friend just had UpSolar UP-M240P panels installed, (google shopping reports £264 per panel).
Said friends array is just short of 200meters away (3.84kW) from mine, and while the weather has been rubbish and dull, 3.84 was putting out 190W, my Sanyo 3.6 was putting 260W.

Does it warrant the money? well if I had more roof space I might have picked the UpSolar, but I wouldn't have even fit 3.6 on my roof, if my roof was a bit bigger, I probably would still have got the Sanyo's to squeeze 4kW on.
If you have lot's of roof space, just pick a panel that has a good company, and good specs.
Sanyo, Sharp and Upsolar are all in the news for industry something or other.

[series530]

I think the answer depends upon your return on investment perspective and your roof space. A couple of percent increase in solar yield with Sanyo's wont cover their additional initial cost over the FIT: A 3.5KWp system using MCS numbers will give you something like £500 extra over 25 years. That will cover the additional cost of, perhaps, two panels. If you take a shorter term 10 year perspective it will probably buy you a meal in a decent restaurant.

However, if you have limited roof space, and ours is a case in point, for the space the Sanyo panels would take, we could only install a system with 85% of the theoretical maximum output of the Sanyo panels. 2188*0.431=£943 vs 2520*0.431=£1086.  Taking a 25 year term the FIT's would pay on harvest £23575 vs £27153 or about £255 per panel. This would just about cover the additional outlay. If we take a more pragmatic view and look at a 10 year plan they wont pay for themselves.

That said, the MCS numbers tend to be conservative and the Sanyo panels claim to provide a significant uplift under low light and high temperature conditions. Their panel outputs also tend to err on the "greater than rated" side so the harvest should be substantially higher. This will move the break even point down from 25 years. To where, who knows.


I work from home and I hope to see a decent power generation under low winter light conditions to offset the lighting and computing energy. With ever increasing electricity prices I also hope to see lines blurring.

It is a finger in the air gamble. I think a longer term view favours them. A shorter term view and you are better off with a cheaper panel.... even with roof space at a premium.

[BruceB]

Get some numbers, run up a spreadsheet and get a net present value of Sanyo vs non-Sanyo.

Provided you are filling your roof (in other words the Sanyo system will be a greater kWp), then:
- the Sanyo system will cost more (naturally);
- the Sanyo system will have a longer payback period and smaller ROI;
- but the Sanyo system will have a higher net present value because after the full 25 years you will make more 'profit' with the larger system.

So the answer is normally a few questions:
- do you have the money?
- can you put off your gratification for 25 years? and
- do you trust the Government(s) for 25 years?

Regards
Bruce

[wattever]

Back in October 2011 I saw an opportunity to resolve this issue. Most panel performance comparisons are really just a comparison of the weather modified by a few geometrical and geographic parameters. What we need is a comparison of complete systems with identical weather, not just a single module as for example in the Sheffield solar farm where the actual output could be more or less than the rated output at STC. Sixteen modules should minimise any random differences from rated output.

My neighbour here in north Dorset was intending to install a system and his son also on the adjacent roof a few feet away. I suggested that in the interests of science, he should install a Sanyo and his son a normal monocrystalline. This they did, both 4kWp systems comprising of 16x250w modules in two rows of 8 and both with an Aurora inverter. The son chose Hyundai modules. The systems are about 10 feet apart, so we can assume they have identical weather, they both face due south and have no shade. The only snag is that the two roofs have different pitches. The Hyundai is 35 deg and the Sanyo 30 deg. This will be accounted for in PVGIS.

The two systems were installed in late November (beating the deadline), so we have two months of performance for comparison. Here are the results:-

Sanyo   December 122 kWh PVGIS 121 kWh   January 174 kWh  PVGIS 139 kWh Slope 30 deg Azimuth South
Hyundai December 125 kWh PVGIS 126 kWh   January 178 kWh  PVGIS 147 kWh Slope 35 deg Azimuth South

So although the Hyundai has outperformed the Sanyo by 2.36%, this is entirely due to roof pitch and it should outperform by 5.77% at this time of year. So in fact, the Sanyo performance exceeds the Hyundai by 3.41% in real terms.

As we move into summer we will get a more accurate picture and will see if the improved temperature coefficient has any effect. I will report later as more data becomes available, and wish that such a comparison had been available when I chose my panel.

Incidentally, the price difference was about £2.5K.

[GavinA]

worth pointing out also that a lot of the differences can be accounted for from improvements in inverter efficiency because the sanyos are higher voltage than virtually all standard panels, which means a 2 x 8 panel string set up of N series sanyo panels will be much nearer the peak efficiency point of the aurora or SMA 4000TL, or most inverters than the same set up of suntechs / hyundais.

that can result in 1-2% efficiency improvements, but those same improvements can be gained using standard panels with other panel configurations / inverter combinations.

that said, the sanyos do perform well. We've installed a hell of a lot of them and had nothing but positive feedback about their performance, output and looks.

At some point soon I'm hoping to get performance data back from as many of the systems we've installed as possible to analyse them against our PVGIS based predictions, and systems using other panels. I just need to find the time....

fwiw, we estimate 5% performance improvements for the sanyos vs other panels after calculating inverter efficiency, and from what we can tell, this seems to be about right.

[nowty]

There has been endless debate on this forum about Sanyo panels verses normal panels.  I agree with most people that the bottom line is that if you have the space, then normal panels are more cost efficient over the lifecycle due to the huge premium in cost for Sanyo’s.

But I don’t quite agree with some who say that a 250w Sanyo panel will give you the same output or yield as a normal 250w panel.  I believe you will get slightly more with a Sanyo panel.

Why ?,

Well, from what I have read, Sanyo's are a hybrid panel of both monocrystalline and thin film technologies.  Thin film technology has 2 advantages over monocrystalline, the first is that their efficiency increases with temperature so they will outperform a similar normal rated panel when baking hot in the mid summer sun.  Indeed Sanyo’s own claim is that they do that at high temperatures.  The second advantage is that they give out their rated output over a much higher range of sun angles than normal monocrystalline panels.  Therefore they will outperform a normal panel most of the time when the sun angle is not optimum.
Having followed PVOUTPUT for several months there are two 4Kw sytems near myself and they consistently outperform everyone else both with their daily peak output and their daily yield for the same sized systems. This is not conclusive but backs up my theory about their thin film component.

There is another quirk of thin film technology which is a bit of a wild card. That is they give out a significantly higher output above their rated output when they are new but degrade back to their rated output quite quickly before degrading more normally. This may end up being the biggest factor why the two local Sanyo systems near me are achieving both higher daily peak and yields. One is only 2 months old and the other around 8 months.

I also never even thought of Gavin's point about higher string voltage, thats another factor, but at least its a permanent one.

So I believe they are better, if more expensive. But I am also sure, if you have the space to put 5kw of normal panels (assuming feeding the same G83/1 compliant inverter), they WILL outperform the Sanyo's and WILL still be cheaper.