4 ms·
First off, normal glass also blocks IR light (which is a good thing) when the outside produces more IR light you want to cool the inside, and when it's producin
by simpleTruth 15y ago
First off, normal glass also blocks IR light (which is a good thing) when the outside produces more IR light you want to cool the inside, and when it's producing less you want to heat the inside.
Anyway, the energy from sunlight is for the most part visible light so you can't really use most of the energy without also blocking visible light. The best option is automatic shades which make the outside look dimmer but don't totally block the view.
- ph0rque 15y agoThe journal article linked to in the article (http://apl.aip.org/resource/1/applab/v98/i11/p113305_s1?bypassSSO=1 http://apl.aip.org/resource/1/applab/v98/i11/p113305_s1?bypa...) mentions near-IR absorption.
- simpleTruth 15y agoIt's an interesting idea, I am simply mentioning the practical limitations. At this point it's a question of how cheaply they can scale it up and how much you can improve the efficiency. Looking at some of their numbers they block ~30+% of the light to gain ~1.3% of the energy you are better off with smaller windows and a high efficiency solar cell around the window. AKA 10% smaller windows block 10% of the light + a 20% efficient solar cell = 2% efficiency. Granted, there is probably a market even in it's current state.
- gamble 15y agoI think the news article exaggerates the purpose of the device described in the actual paper. It isn't intended as a competitor for opaque power generation cells. The idea is that, since you already need an anti-reflective coating to block IR light, it might as well be a coating that can scavenge a bit of the incident power instead of sending it all back into space.