5 ms·

You still need to consider up-front affordability. A product could have high net present value, but if you don't have enough money to purchase it then the produ

You still need to consider up-front affordability. A product could have high net present value, but if you don't have enough money to purchase it then the product might as well not exist. >Usually low cost options have to be replaced so quickly to actually have an impact that they are actually more expensive. I don't think that's what's happening here. You're comparing a product from 3M that's at the "fill out this form for a pilot project and we'll contact you" phase, whereas the Indian products can be bought by the bucketful, today. Some of these coatings have real-world service lifetimes of 5-8 years. How does this compare to your preferred 3M film?

mensetmanusman 4y ago
Yeah, unfortunately it is so new that the information doesn’t exist for exactly this material: https://arpa-e.energy.gov/technologies/projects/passive-radiative-cooling-film https://arpa-e.energy.gov/technologies/projects/passive-radi... Describes the arpa-e funding https://www.startribune.com/can-a-new-3m-technology-help-climate-proof-our-buildings/600155409/ https://www.startribune.com/can-a-new-3m-technology-help-cli... Shows the fruits of the research already reducing energy usage by 10% for supermarkets in a cold climate… Anyway, exciting future!