4 ms·

As far as I can tell, (2) is already being taken into account. The original press release does mention that they need to see how the stacks perform when there's

As far as I can tell, (2) is already being taken into account. The original press release does mention that they need to see how the stacks perform when there's more than one though (because of shading). Why does 45-degree panels reduce efficiency? I mean, it might reduce it when the sun is overhead, but solar power is generally measured in the total wattage it produces over a long period.

jacquesm 15y ago
> does mention that they need to see how the stacks perform when there's more than one though So how can they make this claim today? Besides that, that's pretty easy to calculate, all you need is one of these: http://www.solarpathfinder.com/index http://www.solarpathfinder.com/index It will show you quite precisely what the effect is of the object you place in the path of the suns rays. As for the 45 degree reducing effeciency: solar panels produce power that varies with the angle of the incident light. So if you place one panel at exactly 90 degrees to the incident light (for both 'tilt' and 'pan' or elevation and azimuth if you want to be precise) then you have a panel that performs at maximum efficiency (anywhere from 15 to 30% depending on how much you were willing to pay for your cells). If you use two panels on a 45 degree angle relative to each other the amount of output per panel drops but since you have twice the active surface you can now combine the output of both panels. Since one panel is 100% and the output varies as the co-sine of the angle you now get 0.7 times the output per panel. This gives you 1.4 times the output of a regular panel for a cost-per-watt of 2.0 times the regular panel.
bhousel 15y ago
The press release is a bit misleading.. The "story" is that this accordion arrangement of solar panels increases the solar power generated from a given area. So if you have a square meter of space, you get 'x' Watts/m^2 by laying a flat panel on that space and you can get 'some number higher * x' watts/m^2 by stacking a bunch of panels up above that square meter of space. Forget cost of panels, that's not mentioned. All that is mentioned is you can get more Watts per square meter by stacking more panels. You may be paying 200x more money to get 20x more power. Each individual panel will be less efficient because it is not normal to the incident angle of the sun's rays, however you make up for it by having so many panels that you end up with net more energy. (Most of those panels are wasted though, by not pointing directly at the sun.) It's kind of a dumb "discovery". As a thought experiment, you could even stack your accordion of panels up several miles if cost is no concern. You'd even be able to generate power after sunset (at sea level) :)

jacquesm 15y ago

> does mention that they need to see how the stacks perform when there's more than one though So how can they make this claim today? Besides that, that's pretty easy to calculate, all you need is one of these: http://www.solarpathfinder.com/index http://www.solarpathfinder.com/index It will show you quite precisely what the effect is of the object you place in the path of the suns rays. As for the 45 degree reducing effeciency: solar panels produce power that varies with the angle of the incident light. So if you place one panel at exactly 90 degrees to the incident light (for both 'tilt' and 'pan' or elevation and azimuth if you want to be precise) then you have a panel that performs at maximum efficiency (anywhere from 15 to 30% depending on how much you were willing to pay for your cells). If you use two panels on a 45 degree angle relative to each other the amount of output per panel drops but since you have twice the active surface you can now combine the output of both panels. Since one panel is 100% and the output varies as the co-sine of the angle you now get 0.7 times the output per panel. This gives you 1.4 times the output of a regular panel for a cost-per-watt of 2.0 times the regular panel.

bhousel 15y ago

The press release is a bit misleading.. The "story" is that this accordion arrangement of solar panels increases the solar power generated from a given area. So if you have a square meter of space, you get 'x' Watts/m^2 by laying a flat panel on that space and you can get 'some number higher * x' watts/m^2 by stacking a bunch of panels up above that square meter of space. Forget cost of panels, that's not mentioned. All that is mentioned is you can get more Watts per square meter by stacking more panels. You may be paying 200x more money to get 20x more power. Each individual panel will be less efficient because it is not normal to the incident angle of the sun's rays, however you make up for it by having so many panels that you end up with net more energy. (Most of those panels are wasted though, by not pointing directly at the sun.) It's kind of a dumb "discovery". As a thought experiment, you could even stack your accordion of panels up several miles if cost is no concern. You'd even be able to generate power after sunset (at sea level) :)