3 ms·

The anti-duck-curve is actually really, really pronounced for east-west mounted bifacial panels. The panels still don't generate any electricity at night of co

The anti-duck-curve is actually really, really pronounced for east-west mounted bifacial panels. The panels still don't generate any electricity at night of course, but other than that the output is an almost perfect inverse of the conventional equator-facing angled mounted panel output. Just search for "bifacial solar panels graph".

cman1444 1y ago
Just to be clear, this is only advantageous when compared to fixed solar panels, not solar tracking ones correct?
- Scoundreller 1y ago
  Absolutely but tracking is expensive relative to just throwing more panels at the problem. But shading is also a factor. If you want to get unobstructed sun across the whole day, you need to be built on a nice curve of a hill? Or build just a straight line of panels?
- throwup238 1y ago
  Depends on what you mean by advantageous. Solar tracking setups are very expensive relative to a fixed panel one. They can produce more power per square meter via higher utilization but cost so much it makes more sense to just buy more panels if you have the space.
  - cman1444 1y ago
    I meant advantageous in that the anti-duck-curve of these panels would only be superior compared to the duck curve of a fixed panel. But that it would be inferior compared to the (what I presume is) the very high peak of the regular-duck-curve of a traditional solar tracking panel, since the "tails" of the curve should be similar at sunrise/sunset. But I see now that solar tracking seems to have fallen out of favor due to the economics of how cheap panels are.
- Loic 1y ago
  The economics changed, it is now cheaper to put more panels East/West than having tracking ones as the tracking hardware is expensive. The tracking panels have the advantage to be put vertically in case of heavy hail.
madaxe_again 1y ago
My next array is likely to be east-west vertical bifacials, as I need only a small amount of additional capacity in the summer, but could still do more in the winter. We currently have: - summer optimised array: almost flat, 15 degree, optimised for maximum power on sunny summer days, mostly runs our cooling - winter/morning array. Points SSE, 65 degree incline. Gets great energy in the mornings, and on winter mornings. Performs surprisingly well in overcast conditions. Generates about the same power in midwinter and midsummer. - winter/afternoon array. Same as the above, but SSW. 18kW total faceplate capacity, in reality we peak at around 5kW, but have that for about six hours of the day for 9 months of the year. Also means I can run three arrays on two MPPTs as the two tilted arrays are basically mutually exclusive as to when they make power. The other reason for leaning towards vertical panels is cleaning. The flat panels accumulate a crust of crap (pollen, soot, dust) that cements on there fast, and requires vigorous scrubbing to remove. Kills 20% of the capacity unless I get up there with a broom every six weeks. The 65 degree ones I have not had to clean once, as stuff just slides off them. That, and a pallet of bifacials is now cheaper than a pallet of monofacials.

cman1444 1y ago

Just to be clear, this is only advantageous when compared to fixed solar panels, not solar tracking ones correct?

Scoundreller 1y ago
Absolutely but tracking is expensive relative to just throwing more panels at the problem. But shading is also a factor. If you want to get unobstructed sun across the whole day, you need to be built on a nice curve of a hill? Or build just a straight line of panels?
throwup238 1y ago
Depends on what you mean by advantageous. Solar tracking setups are very expensive relative to a fixed panel one. They can produce more power per square meter via higher utilization but cost so much it makes more sense to just buy more panels if you have the space.
- cman1444 1y ago
  I meant advantageous in that the anti-duck-curve of these panels would only be superior compared to the duck curve of a fixed panel. But that it would be inferior compared to the (what I presume is) the very high peak of the regular-duck-curve of a traditional solar tracking panel, since the "tails" of the curve should be similar at sunrise/sunset. But I see now that solar tracking seems to have fallen out of favor due to the economics of how cheap panels are.
Loic 1y ago
The economics changed, it is now cheaper to put more panels East/West than having tracking ones as the tracking hardware is expensive. The tracking panels have the advantage to be put vertically in case of heavy hail.

madaxe_again 1y ago

My next array is likely to be east-west vertical bifacials, as I need only a small amount of additional capacity in the summer, but could still do more in the winter. We currently have: - summer optimised array: almost flat, 15 degree, optimised for maximum power on sunny summer days, mostly runs our cooling - winter/morning array. Points SSE, 65 degree incline. Gets great energy in the mornings, and on winter mornings. Performs surprisingly well in overcast conditions. Generates about the same power in midwinter and midsummer. - winter/afternoon array. Same as the above, but SSW. 18kW total faceplate capacity, in reality we peak at around 5kW, but have that for about six hours of the day for 9 months of the year. Also means I can run three arrays on two MPPTs as the two tilted arrays are basically mutually exclusive as to when they make power. The other reason for leaning towards vertical panels is cleaning. The flat panels accumulate a crust of crap (pollen, soot, dust) that cements on there fast, and requires vigorous scrubbing to remove. Kills 20% of the capacity unless I get up there with a broom every six weeks. The 65 degree ones I have not had to clean once, as stuff just slides off them. That, and a pallet of bifacials is now cheaper than a pallet of monofacials.