7 ms·
> "Install in half the cost, half the time on 33% of the land" If the panels don't point directly at the sun, then you lose much of the efficiency. I wonder h
by mycall 4y ago
> "Install in half the cost, half the time on 33% of the land"
If the panels don't point directly at the sun, then you lose much of the efficiency.
I wonder how the robot cleaner handles bird poop.
- Hermitude 4y agoHorizontal panels also collect dust, so they still need to be propping them on the north side.
- gleenn 4y agoThey don't look propped at all in the photos. Also I think propping would be hard for the cleaning robot as it looks like is a super simple little robot with small wheels and just rolls straightened over them.
- StillBored 4y agoYah its probably a case that designing a vacmop style device (possibly purchased off the open market?) and having it drive around on a flat surface is both cheaper and keeps the panels cleaner than a custom bot that doesn't clean as frequently because it costs to much. My question is whether sitting on the ground itself causes problems with efficiency due to the panels getting hotter than they would with some airflow under them.
- pnw 4y agoAccording to the research on their site, ground mount solar has better heat dissipation than roof mount solar, and isn't that far behind racked systems, so it's not really a concern. The ground ends up acting as a heat sink. https://www.erthos.com/modeling-heat-dissipation-in-earth-mount-solar-pv https://www.erthos.com/modeling-heat-dissipation-in-earth-mo...
- tuatoru 4y agoErthos spend quite a bit of time designing their own autonomous cleaning and repair robot.
- avip 4y agoAll panels collect dust, but this setup is much more challenging to clean (and to generally service, i.e to replace a faulty panel)
- nimos 4y agoThis seems much easier to clean? A gigantic flat slab is pretty easy to automate something vs disconnected racks.
- avip 4y ago(Modern utility scale PV installations are already using automated cleaning solutions). It is much better from POV of the cleaning robot maneuvering requirements. It's also much better in terms of single robot can access the entire installation. But it's worse in terms of how much distance the dust should be pushed before it's off panel (as I don't see any gaps there)
- CuriousCosmic 4y agoAlternatively if the robot is a vacuum or something of the like, it could just store the excess dust and dump it at a station on the edge.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoService trade-off seems pretty marginal. They say the panels aren't tied down to the ground in any way, so you might be able to just pick one up and disconnect it
- elihu 4y agoThey have a robot that cleans the panels. It's a big, flat surface so they don't really need anything much more advanced than a Roomba. Apparently they also have special shoes that maintenance people can wear that distribute the weight properly so they can walk on them if they have to.
- constantlm 4y agoSounds like they're pretty confident this isn't an issue: >Our fees are based on the plant producing at its optimal performance. If the plant underperforms for any reason, we curtail our fees – creating strong incentive and perfect alignment with the long-term asset owner.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoIt all comes down to the economic tradeoffs. Panels are cheap and everything else is expensive. If you can get 75% efficiency for half the cost, your return on investment is 50% higher
- tejohnso 4y agoSolar in Texas seems like an obvious win in just about any configuration. But I wonder how this would work at higher northern latitudes in the winter. I suspect efficiency would be pretty bad with a 20 degree incidence.
- chefandy 4y agoDoesn't have to be effective everywhere for it to be useful.
- nine_k 4y agoPanels may be cheap, maintenance / replacement is less so, because humans at work.
- theptip 4y agoThey use a robot for regular cleaning; looks like the design will make that cheaper too as it's basically a fancy Roomba.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoReplacing might be cheaper as well without any mounting racks or tracks.
- dahfizz 4y agoEveryone is talking about maintenance ITT. Is it that big of a concern? My parents have had solar on their roof for almost 10 years now with zero issues. I imagine newer panels last longer. So what's the actual maintenance cost? I could imagine it's going to be cheaper to just install new panels every few decades than constantly maintaining the installation to be 100% capacity.
- sorenjan 4y agoI don't understand why they cant dig some kind of trench or mound to put them on at least, to angle them more towards the sun. There's plenty of agricultural equipment designed to cultivate soil (first example I found[0]). That could take care of the drainage as well, although I don't know how much it rains in Texas. [0] https://www.asa-lift.com/asalift/producttypes/bodenbearbeitung/gf-400 https://www.asa-lift.com/asalift/producttypes/bodenbearbeitu...
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> why they cant dig some kind of trench or mound to put them on at least, to angle them more towards the sun Trench will flood. Mound needs to be maintained. Cheaper to put more static panels flat than trying to get every electron out of them.
- rootusrootus 4y ago> why they cant dig some kind of trench or mound to put them on at least Just use the rack then, it's exactly the same result.
- sorenjan 4y agoI think using the dirt that's already there and building the structure with some kind of machine would be cheaper than having someone mounting them on a steel rack. See for instance large potato fields [0]. The point is instead of putting them on flat ground, make the ground have a better shape first. [0] http://www.thompsonpotatofarm.com/common-tater/banking-the-potato-farm-way http://www.thompsonpotatofarm.com/common-tater/banking-the-p...
- rootusrootus 4y agoThe racks are really easy, well known technology. That was my point. If you're going to give up the entire reason for laying them flat on the ground, you're going back to the way existing solar farms work, so just use the same proven technology.
- deleted 4y ago
- dahfizz 4y ago> If the panels don't point directly at the sun, then you lose much of the efficiency. This is true for a single panel. But the amount of sunlight which hits an acre of land is constant. If the land is 100% covered with panels, the panels will collect 100% of the available sunlight. Installations that tilt the panels have lots of space between the panels.
- t3pfaff 4y ago> This is true for a single panel. But the amount of sunlight which hits an acre of land is constant. If the land is 100% covered with panels, the panels will collect 100% of the available sunlight. That is not true from my understanding. The increased solar angle of incidence effects how much of the energy reflects back into the sky. Having more panels next to it without a gap won't change that. Yes you can fit more panels in the same area without putting them on an angle but they will be quite a bit less efficient because more light will be reflecting back up per sqft of panel which is what matters cost wise.
- nick4780167 4y agoThe anti reflective layers and texture on the panels are usually pretty good, such that then reflection is less than the area loss due to the angle.
- tuatoru 4y agoYes, one of the many areas of improvement of PV modules in the last couple of years has been reducing reflections from the surface of the glass and from the glass-cell boundary in panels. Also changed cell technology (n-TOPCon) helps with reflections and recombination within the cells.
- sacred_numbers 4y agoThere is a small loss of efficiency (<2%) at extreme angles, but it is not too significant[1] [1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611928/#:~:text=So%2C%20it%20is%20concluded%20that,angle%20of%20incidence%20of%20sunlight https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611928/#:~:tex....
- legohead 4y agoYou get the majority of the power when the sun is directly overhead. You can make up the lost difference by the space saving and just adding more panels.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoThe sun is never directly overhead except on the summer solstice at noon, assuming you're in roughly the part of your timezone.
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoAnd then only at the equator. Here in Iowa at 42' North, you'd want a panel tilted 42' South to start with.
- drumttocs8 4y agoMost utility scale installations don’t track the sun- too much cost. This takes cost-saving to a new level though.