3 ms·

I've read the argument that it's the opposite: since there is plenty of area left for solar panels (roofs, for one thing), efficiency (in terms of energy per ar

by morsch 10y ago

I've read the argument that it's the opposite: since there is plenty of area left for solar panels (roofs, for one thing), efficiency (in terms of energy per area) is less important than price (energy per dollar). OTOH, I have also read that for many installations, especially home-scale ones, the cost of the solar panels itself is in the same magnitude as all the other installation costs; in that case, the best way reduce price (and increase energy per dollar) would be to increase efficiency, effectively installing "more energy" at the same time for the same installation cost. So maybe we don't need cheaper panels, but do need cheaper installations, and a way to do that is to have more efficient panels.

agumonkey 10y ago
There's also transparent cells, a few companies are trying to market them right now. Lot of areas to reuse, probably low installation fees too.
- galdosdi 10y ago
  Interesting! But for every bit of light that goes through, that's light not being used by the panel. Do these transparent cells do any better in terms of effeciency than just using a more effecient, nontransparent, smaller cell combined with a regular window? For example, what gives more energy, a transparent cell of 1 square meter area of 50% opacity, or a regular cell of 2 square meters?
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    Detail: it's not a "visible lightwave" cell, it captures near infra red and other part of the non visible spectrum, so the usual light energy is not absorbed, it's 95%+ transparent for us, but it yields some voltage. I don't have the figures (I should have looked at); the first company I've seen was Ubiquitous Energy (from a Stanford or MIT lab prof. circa 2013). I've read on some research paper that there are other in the competition. Maybe the power output is too low.. considering how many zillions of office windows could be converted I assumed they'd be as famous as tesla.
adrianN 10y ago
Or you make the solar panels easier to install.

by morsch 10y ago

agumonkey 10y ago

There's also transparent cells, a few companies are trying to market them right now. Lot of areas to reuse, probably low installation fees too.

galdosdi 10y ago
Interesting! But for every bit of light that goes through, that's light not being used by the panel. Do these transparent cells do any better in terms of effeciency than just using a more effecient, nontransparent, smaller cell combined with a regular window? For example, what gives more energy, a transparent cell of 1 square meter area of 50% opacity, or a regular cell of 2 square meters?
- agumonkey 10y ago
  Detail: it's not a "visible lightwave" cell, it captures near infra red and other part of the non visible spectrum, so the usual light energy is not absorbed, it's 95%+ transparent for us, but it yields some voltage. I don't have the figures (I should have looked at); the first company I've seen was Ubiquitous Energy (from a Stanford or MIT lab prof. circa 2013). I've read on some research paper that there are other in the competition. Maybe the power output is too low.. considering how many zillions of office windows could be converted I assumed they'd be as famous as tesla.

adrianN 10y ago

Or you make the solar panels easier to install.