[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 35 KB, 347x380, diagram.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262511 No.3262511 [Reply] [Original]

What are the practical limitations that limit solar power to it's current percentage effectiveness? Could we make them more practical/efficient?

>> No.3262513

entropy

>> No.3262538

>3262513
wut?

>> No.3262544
File: 137 KB, 1920x1049, carlsagansetting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262544

http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/28/caltech-gurus-whip-up-highly-efficient-low-cost-flexible-solar/

I believe about a kW of energy is bestowed by the sun per square meter on Earth.

>> No.3262545

>>3262511
energy/cost ratio

>> No.3262547

>>3262544
I love Inudares. #1 tripfag. So optimistic, must be a nice person.

>> No.3262554
File: 32 KB, 252x252, 1266762982940.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262554

>>3262547
Oh shit, I completely forgot I decided to quit /sci/.

4chan is worse than a meth addiction.

>> No.3262571

>>3262544
>put bubbles in the substrate to scatter the light all the way up and down the Si wires
>prevent almost any reflection
that's actually pretty damn clever.

they need a working model right the fuck now. but 90 to 100 percent "quantum efficiency" doesn't mean much

>> No.3262580
File: 16 KB, 400x300, mfw_foal_poni_pedo-(n1300763613492).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262580

Mfw the Arizona desert is a haven for solar farms and not nothing farms.

>> No.3262613
File: 56 KB, 700x436, PS10_solar_power_tower.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262613

Isnt concentrated thermal solar power better than photovoltaics? Advatages include higher efficiency, no efficiency degradation over time and easier manufacturing than PV panels, also no need for toxic substances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power

>> No.3262620

>>3262571
>but 90 to 100 percent "quantum efficiency" doesn't mean much

That's not what they said. 90 to 100 percent conversion of -all- photons.

>The arrays can convert between 90 and 100 percent of the photons they absorb into electrons, and yes, that does mean that they have a near-perfect internal quantum efficiency.

>> No.3262627

>>3262613
silver be expensive to buy and maintain it's mirror shine.
Oh and they need no fly zones put up around them.

>> No.3262634

>not thorium or fusion
>derp

>> No.3262641

>>3262613
But, the predicted capacity in 2050 is only 1500 gigawatts. Only slightly over times three than what we have now. And doesn't photo-voltaic have the potential to move into space? I don't think thermals would works so well, but maybe.

>> No.3262656

>>3262634
Assuming the two projects can't be undertaken at the same time? Put all of your technological eggs in one energy source basket like we have today with hydrocarbons, and diversity starts to look important.

>> No.3262662

>>3262620
converting all the photons into exited electrons =/= being able to use all of those exited electrons to generate power. hence quantum efficiency.

>> No.3262686

>>3262662
No, you are still getting that backwards. They ARE converting most of the light into usable electricity.

>> No.3262701
File: 354 KB, 671x494, Dish_Stirling_Systems_of_SBP_in_Spain.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3262701

>>3262627

"In 2009, scientists at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and SkyFuel teamed to develop large curved sheets of metal that have the potential to be 30% less expensive than today's best collectors of concentrated solar power by replacing glass-based models with a silver polymer sheet that has the same performance as the heavy glass mirrors, but at a much lower cost and much lower weight. It also is much easier to deploy and install. The glossy film uses several layers of polymers, with an inner layer of pure silver."

>> No.3262958

>>3262634
i'm the biggest thorium nut on here and even i think this solar panel development is great

>>3262686
either way it's worded poorly. if we're talking 90 to 100% efficiency of solar energy to electrical energy conversion, it's going to blow pretty much everything else out of the water. like, three square meters of solar panels powers the average american household all the time, no grid.

>> No.3263077

^That's what I'm saying, is that a feasibility? Discuss.

>> No.3263740

Bamp

>> No.3263780
File: 25 KB, 500x500, solarpanels.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3263780

>>3262613

>>Isnt concentrated thermal solar power better than photovoltaics?

Yes, but not suitable for home use for obvious reasons.

I had bad experiences with a lot of small cheap "solar battery cell phone charger" dealies which sort of soured me to the whole idea until on a whim I picked up a nice big portable folding array. It was such overkill for charging my electronics that it even works with indirect sunlight. I have it sitting just inside the window, no sunlight seems to be hitting it directly, but it's charging my phone like a boss.

I'm now considering picking up a battery pack/inverter combo unit like the Duracel Powerpack HD and using the larger of the two panel arrays I own to charge that guy, so I can plug my laptop into it. :3