Goodbye to the idea that solar panels “die” after 25 years. A new study says the warranty does not mark the end, and real-world performance can last for decades
Goodbye to the idea that solar panels “die” after 25 years. A new study says the warranty does not mark the end, and real-world performance can last for decades
This is not news but a useful reminder nonetheless.
Advances in efficiency may cause replacing them to be viable. Still.
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.
Depends on how you define eco friendly.
The old panels already exist so if you can use them without having to transport them across the world (like the parent comment suggests), continuing to use them is eco-friendlier than producing new ones, which requires additional CO2 from manufacturing
Not doing anything at all has the lowest emissions. But it is obviously not the best way to curb impact while preserving lives and quality of life.
Your adversity to investments that do pay off would be a great hinderance to society as a whole.
Solar panels can be recycled, take very little materials and manufacturing and are usually not the limiting factor when it comes to transitioning into a low damage economy.
Throwing away great amounts of cheap solar power because you would have to lift a finger to achieve it is not… Great.
Solar panels can be recycled,
Most can’t, especially the old ones are glued shut.
Using something that still works as long as it doesn’t produce emissions…. Is actually the single best way to curb impact, yeah.
Like literally the best use is long-term. If it still works and you can eek some power out of it rather than toss it, there’s no harm doing so.
Assuming you can recycle it now, you can also recycle it down the line when it genuinely isn’t worth keeping anymore. Until then, if you’ve got space, might as well. Because recycling isn’t free, in energy, emissions, or labor.
preserving lives and quality of life.
ROFL what? Continuing to use old panels in addition to new ones harms lives and quality of life? Ridiculous.
Limiting power output cause more fossils to be burned…? What are you even on about? Nobody said use old panels instead of new ones for absolutely everything, yet your argument is based on that, best I can tell, pretty much entirely.
You act like nobody can possibly have their own land and a use case for long-term low-power-draw use. That’s why it’s ridiculous.
No, a lot of the places where old solar panels would be useful can’t feed the grid even if they want to because the grid doesn’t reach them. It isn’t worth the cost to utility companies to expand for such low density, so that has to be paid by the property owner. It would in fact cost several thousand to have electric run out to some of those places. I’ve priced it out for various properties I’ve looked at and frankly staying off grid is substantially cheaper in a lot of places. Even If there’s already a grid connection but you don’t want to spend a small fortune to run electric half a mile to where you need it, an off grid solar system is perfect. Not everything has to be in service of everyone for it to be a good option.
Opportunity cost for installing old panels? Such as? If you are suggesting the land itself is more valuable without solar on it, that tells me you don’t know much about rural land use or farming properties. I grew up rural on a bit of land, and we had lots of places that would have been great for solar panels because they weren’t much good for anything else. Rocky, seasonally flooded, pasture space stuff like that. Additionally, if you install solar panels ~6 ft off the ground and well spaced, they can be used over things like garden beds, and actually increase productivity by providing relief from the sun. Or if you mean it still costs to obtain and install, that depends heavily on who puts it up, where it came from, and who they know. Lots of people with land are quite capable of installing a solar array, even if they don’t do the wiring themselves, and they usually know someone who’s willing to help with the electrical work.
My goal one day is to have enough yard space to do an on ground set up. Insanely cheap if you pick up some used panels. The average person would only need an electrician to hook it up to the house.
I understand not being comfortable with diy roof mounting, I know I’m not. The costs scale quickly when it goes on the roof
Sure! That’s why I talk it might be critical for rooftop, but maybe useful somewhere else.
I’m pretty certain it may make economic sense to install something like this in a large open area. If the panels were meant to be thrown away, the price must be tiny.
Anyhow, I expect this to be more common once the mass-produced solar of the last decade gets old. We may just not be there yet to have plenty of used solar to offer.
Possibly of relevance to this instance… I’m already in a 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.
If he’s going to have to install batteries, would it make sense to shove all that permitting money into more batteries and go completely off-grid instead?
At least around here, you can just tell the utility company to fuck off if you are off-grid
Decades?
25 years is “decades” too
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.
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.
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