5 ms·
The trouble with your example is that a car is not a dyson sphere. A car is a few square meters, which means that with a 30% efficient pv panel (double the eff
by khafra 17y ago
The trouble with your example is that a car is not a dyson sphere. A car is a few square meters, which means that with a 30% efficient pv panel (double the efficiency of the current standard), you'd only be getting around 15hp at noon. That's enough to toddle around a closed track at 30mph in a carbon fiber frame built by a university, but not enough to outdo a bicycle in real-world applications.
Fixed solar power plants are more promising, but they're not perfect--Sure, a square 100 miles on a side in Arizona could supply a lot of power, but not to New York or Seattle, even over the best HVDC lines. And 1,000 square miles is a helluva lot of monocrystalline silicon. Solar thermal looks more promising, especially for keeping the power going at night, but it's far from a panacea, and there's lots of companies working on it. I've invested in a few of them.
- frossie 17y agoYou are are right about that. Of course you could look at the question laterally - solar energy comes from fusion, so if we could master fusion, we would cut out the middle man. ITER is trying hard, but I can't help feeling that if we had a modern day Manhattan/Apollo type project for fusion energy we could make faster progress.