this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
490 points (100.0% liked)

Solarpunk technology

4210 readers
1 users here now

Technology for a Solar-Punk future.

Airships and hydroponic farms...

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 71 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is not news but a useful reminder nonetheless.

Advances in efficiency may cause replacing them to be viable. Still.

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I wish we could still install the old panels somewhere. They might not be good enough to be rooftop solar anymore, but in the field, why not take all they can still give?

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Because solar panels are dirt cheap to produce and your time and construction materials and land has value. Recognizing trash is vital for an eco friendly economy.

Edit: some red necks do use old solar panels for off grid, low cost setups.

[–] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 week ago (10 children)

But that relies on the capitalist assumption that producing trash and CO2 is free because you can dump it withouth having to pay for it, and destroying nature to stripmine for the raw resources only costs the purchasing price because the environment isn't monetized.

Plus the imperialist assertion that providing decentralized electricity to poor people in developing nations is net negative because it increases the cost of labor from those regions because they can do other productive things than work in your factory.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

You’ve got to have space you want to use for them. Just because I have 10 200w panels for free doesn’t mean it makes sense to mount them on my roof (which is the only space I have facing the sun), because 400+w are available now and it costs money to mount them.

But it might not make sense to take down my 20 year old 200w panels and replace them, or maybe I can sell them to someone with more space.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] French75@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Possibly of relevance to this instance... my dad's place is already in a situation where this would make senses. He did solar early, and has 235w panels. It was not quite sufficient to cover his demand, but close. Current panels of the same footprint are 400w. Replacing them would give him coverage of his needs, plus enough to charge an EV, which weren't really a thing when he installed the solar array. His array isn't even on a rooftop. It's on a canopy in the yard. He designed it thinking some time down the road he'd replace the panels and inverter if need/opportunity arose.

Unfortunately our electric utility changed their net metering and permitting rules, and he can't replace the panels and inverter. They'll only permit it as a new system, which would mean dramatically more expense than just panels and inverter. He'd get a markedly worse rate plan, and would need to install batteries as well.

Replacing them would be a financial no-brainer, and a quick job if not for the utility.

They continue to work, even if output is degraded. Newer planels installed in the same location overheated and their elements cracked, indicating inferior manufacturing quality, but the oldest batch is not showing this symptom.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Looking at six solar arrays in Switzerland that have been running since the late 1980s and early 1990s, the team found most panels still produced more than 80% of their original power after three decades.

Temperature turned out to be a major character in the story. The study reports that lower-altitude systems faced higher thermal stress, with module temperatures reaching about 20 degrees Celsius warmer than high-altitude sites, and those hotter panels tended to degrade faster.

Some of the wear mechanisms were very specific but easy to picture. The encapsulant, the clear plastic layer that helps protect and hold the solar cells, showed more breakdown in hotter conditions, and the researchers linked that to chemical byproducts that can contribute to corrosion over time.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I wonder if new panels last even better, since there's been more R&D done and manufacturers should have more experience now

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Or worse because how to make.money selliing more panels, aka the enshitifcation of solar.panels.

That said I had some installed on my off grid solar cabin 20 yrs ago, 220w per panel, had some new panels installed on my small rural cottage late last uear, 370W per panel, same size panel, so that was sweet. I retired decades ago and run my home through the day on solar (hot wayer system only switches on to use solar thru the day, induction cooktop etc). and sell the excess solar to the grid, including charging my ecar off solar only.

I am not sure how this is new though, i've always worked on a 1%-2% degredation per year for panels, not a cliff like degradation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I highly suspect so. Chemicals are just so much better than they were in the past.

[–] Nioxic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Decades?

25 years is “decades” too

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

Prolly about 80 years or so. While yield slowly dimish they will be more useful as scrap due to advancing tech as opposed to breaking. Also some panels may die but that's rather rare.

[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 19 points 1 week ago

Three decades, three climates: environmental and material impacts on the long-term reliability of photovoltaic modules† https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/el/d4el00040d

the paper

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"warranty" is a label that manufacturers put on the product for legal reasons. there's no reason to assume that the product will break after that point. literally some products last 5x what's written on the warranty.

In most industries for expensive items, manufacturers devise warranties to run out before the product is broken. Making it longer has a relatively small benefit (consumers might put a little bit more confidence in the longevity of a product with a 25 year warranty than one with a 20 year warranty), and making it too long has a pretty high cost (a bunch of warranty claims).

Especially if the useful lifetime is not well known, the incentive is for manufacturers to underpromise in their warranties. All of this applied to solar panels sold 25 years ago, and 25 years was long enough to sell people in solar panels and a line of credit as something that would pay for itself. In that context, I think it would be surprising if the panels didn't last far longer than the warranty promised.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

We have some 25yo panels around, small 25-40W ones. They usually die because the diode goes (which is fixable) or one of the traces in the back gets water in it and it shorts. We're probably down to about 2 out of 10, and those were high quality panels at the time.

And for what we paid for one 40W panel then, you could buy 2000W worth today.

[–] Randelung@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

The development in recent years has been insane. I'm positively astounded.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Most roofing in the US barely lasts 25 years.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

25 years? Good luck getting even that far, unless you put solar panels on top of them....

(Replaced roof after 15 years, and lots of repairs starting at 10 years)

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

accounting depreciation is different from real world performance

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Depreciation says a computer evaporates after 3 or 5 years in most companies.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My grandmother had an incandescent light bulb in her house that had been there since the early 1900s and still worked. But, compared to modern bulbs it was pretty dim, used very thick glass, and was pretty overbuilt. Modern incandescent bulbs are not built to last. They're brighter, and they're cheaper, but not as durable.

Looking at the picture, I wonder if modern panels will last the same way.

Solar panels in the 1980s were big, inefficient, chonky things. If they weren't hand assembled, they sure looked hand-assembled.

1980s solar panel

Modern solar cells are much more efficient and clearly machine assembled. They use much finer wires, which might be more fragile:

Modern solar panel

It wouldn't surprise me if part of the trade off to get cells that have double the efficiency at half the price you also have to give up on some durability.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

examined six grid-connected solar systems installed between 1987 and 1993 across different Swiss regions

tldr, ambient heat makes a huge difference. Switzerland doesn't get that hot anywhere, and even less so in mountains.

But these are extremely old panels. Panels in 2020 started shipping with 40 and 50 year warrantees. But even panels that drop to 50% of original capacity, 60-100 years later, the best strategy for adding more power is more panels rather than ripping out and replacement. For a house, that can mean balcony solar, east/west, solar sheds, driveway awnings or solar RVs.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

I’m sure they will build them to fail

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Most roofs last 25-30 years or so. I suspect the amount of time that solar panels need to be replaced is around the same time since replacing the panels after you replace the roof only a few years beforehand might be most costly.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago

This is like my wet dream right now. Please let perovskites cover the world!

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Same goes for EV batteries. It’s just fear mongering.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Those do degrade. New chemistries will hopefully lead to longer lasting though. Also different tech, solar doesn't have the same chemical reaction that can degrade. Not sure how solar degrades, it might be more from the manufacturing process.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I have been a licenced tech for 30 years. Have worked on EV since 2013, and have never seen a degraded battery to the point it requires replacement.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

QED for everything everywhere forever.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago

To a much lesser extent. Solar panels work a real long time real good. EVs range loss does impact practical use much more than lowering the power output of a solar array.

[–] Teppichbrand@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Last year, I built DIY solar on my garden shed. I got the modules for free, they had been installed on a supermarket roof for over 20 years. The manufacturer no longer exists, but the modules are still > 95% efficient. Of course new modules are smaller and produce twice as much electricity in the same space. But I didn't care, I had the space and I really like the solar punk look of the old blue modules.

[–] thickurt@woof.group 5 points 1 week ago

@poVoq 25 years is decades

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (4 children)

exactly! they can last at least 2.5 decades.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I have a few solar panels installed in 2008.

They are mounted in an extremely bad location: on a south facing wall, without proper airflow on the back side.

They continue to work, even if output is degraded. Newer planels installed in the same location overheated and their elements cracked, indicating inferior manufacturing quality, but the oldest batch is not showing this symptom.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Many Japanese homes are still using solar water heaters that were installed in the 1980s. They’re very inefficient now, but they still work if you take care of them.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 12 points 1 week ago

That's an entirely different technology. A solar water heater is essentially a specialized greenhouse with tubes and no moving parts. You just need go clean them every one to 4 years.

[–] cogman@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh no. Water heaters are the most efficient form of solar. Newer solar water heaters might be a bit more efficient than old systems, but we are talking like 80->90%. PVC solar peaks in the 20% range.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

25 years is still a very long time.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The real question is, will it be worth replacing them with whatever is out after 25 years of efficiency improvements.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›