Most solar reseller beginers ask questions:mono solar panel and poly solar panel,which is better?
First, we’ll review the pros and cons of monocrystalline solar cells vs polycrystalline solar cells. Then, we’ll let you decide: Which would you want for your residential power plant?
Solar cells made of monocrystalline silicon are black and very uniform in appearance, which is an indication of their high purity.
Pros:
Cons:
The first solar panels based on polycrystalline silicon were introduced to the market in 1981. These panels are blue and sometimes have a variegated pattern.
Pros:
Cons:
We’ll compare on as equal a basis as possible using the following solar panels available on end customer's buying price at Amazon:
To normalize for wattage, multiply $196 times 285W and divide by 260W. Therefore, the adjusted cost difference is $215 per panel for poly vs. $249 per panel for mono. For an average 2,000 SF house that uses 7,500 kwHr annually, the required 18 monocrystalline panels would cost $612 more than the less efficient, shorter-lived poly panels.
Most solar panels on today’s market come with a 25-year warranty (performance guarantee). This generally means a guaranteed electrical production for 10 years at 90% of rated power output and 25 years at 80%. But be advised that all performance guarantees are not the same.Be sure to check the small print on the warranties for the panels you’re considering.
Of course we don’t have data on the performance of solar panels 30-40 years down the line but the projection is that monocrystalline panels (based on purity and the other characteristics mentioned above) will keep generating a significant amount of electricity and bring in savings for many years after the warranty expires and will ultimately stand the test of time far better than polycrystalline panels.
Is it more than just polycrystalline solar cells vs monocrystalline solar cells? Thin-film solar cells also exist, but their prevalence in the residential market is so limited at this time that we don’t consider them a viable option in this comparison.
Most solar reseller beginers ask questions:mono solar panel and poly solar panel,which is better?
First, we’ll review the pros and cons of monocrystalline solar cells vs polycrystalline solar cells. Then, we’ll let you decide: Which would you want for your residential power plant?
Solar cells made of monocrystalline silicon are black and very uniform in appearance, which is an indication of their high purity.
Pros:
Cons:
The first solar panels based on polycrystalline silicon were introduced to the market in 1981. These panels are blue and sometimes have a variegated pattern.
Pros:
Cons:
We’ll compare on as equal a basis as possible using the following solar panels available on end customer's buying price at Amazon:
To normalize for wattage, multiply $196 times 285W and divide by 260W. Therefore, the adjusted cost difference is $215 per panel for poly vs. $249 per panel for mono. For an average 2,000 SF house that uses 7,500 kwHr annually, the required 18 monocrystalline panels would cost $612 more than the less efficient, shorter-lived poly panels.
Most solar panels on today’s market come with a 25-year warranty (performance guarantee). This generally means a guaranteed electrical production for 10 years at 90% of rated power output and 25 years at 80%. But be advised that all performance guarantees are not the same.Be sure to check the small print on the warranties for the panels you’re considering.
Of course we don’t have data on the performance of solar panels 30-40 years down the line but the projection is that monocrystalline panels (based on purity and the other characteristics mentioned above) will keep generating a significant amount of electricity and bring in savings for many years after the warranty expires and will ultimately stand the test of time far better than polycrystalline panels.
Is it more than just polycrystalline solar cells vs monocrystalline solar cells? Thin-film solar cells also exist, but their prevalence in the residential market is so limited at this time that we don’t consider them a viable option in this comparison.