Solar panel efficency
in [Design]
|
From: Jan Panteltje on 31 May 2010 06:23 On a sunny day (Sun, 30 May 2010 21:03:16 -0700) it happened Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote in <aNednXw0P7ZkqZ7RnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet>: > Well, absolutely NO energy source is renewable; the sun is in a >downward nuclear fission / fusion path leading to iron. > What i looked for was an energy source that did not require energy >rich carbon sources (trees, oil); the other alternative would be foot >powered generators. Well, oil is free these days, just take a bucket and help the clean-up. And if you are a veggy then feet powered generators bikes0 are fed by your eating vegetables. So there really is no problem.
From: PeterD on 31 May 2010 07:37 On Sun, 30 May 2010 20:54:51 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: >Artemus wrote: >> "Robert Baer" <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote in message >> news:9e-dnUxMSfcAS5_RnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet... >>> I did a survey and this is the best i got. >>> Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & >>> monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film >>> cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium >>> selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin >>> film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). >>> >>> The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on >>> the web). >>> >>> Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion >>> of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given >>> panel)? >>> Is there another (commercially available) technology even more efficient? >> >> Are you restricted in the available real estate on which to put your collector(s)? >> Are you concerned about the cost to place them in orbit? >> If not then you may want to consider the $/watt efficiency instead. >> Or not. >> Art >> >> > No real estate restrictions but do not need much panel area to light >a small room. > Orbit? Are you nuts? > Do you have an an answer to the posed question? He might have had an answer, but I predict he won't remember it now...
From: Sylvia Else on 31 May 2010 08:25 On 31/05/2010 1:54 PM, Robert Baer wrote: > Artemus wrote: >> "Robert Baer" <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote in message >> news:9e-dnUxMSfcAS5_RnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet... >>> I did a survey and this is the best i got. >>> Makers: (1) BP Solar technology: Advanced multicrystalline & >>> monocrystalline silicon nitride; (2) First Solar modules: Thin film >>> cadmium telluride; (3) Nanosolar: Thin film CIGS (copper indium gallium >>> selenium); (4) Sharp: Monocrystalline & polycrystalline (silicon?) (Thin >>> film?); (5) Evergreen Solar: Silicon (Mono? Poly? not mentioned). >>> >>> The questions in above are due to incompleteness of disclosure (on >>> the web). >>> >>> Of those technologies, which one is the MOST efficient in conversion >>> of light / solar energy to electrical power (assume ideal load for given >>> panel)? >>> Is there another (commercially available) technology even more >>> efficient? >> >> Are you restricted in the available real estate on which to put your >> collector(s)? >> Are you concerned about the cost to place them in orbit? >> If not then you may want to consider the $/watt efficiency instead. >> Or not. >> Art >> >> > No real estate restrictions but do not need much panel area to light a > small room. I'd just open the curtains myself. > Orbit? Are you nuts? It's a reasonable question. Solar panels are frequently sent into orbit. Sylvia.
From: John Fields on 31 May 2010 08:43 On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:25:27 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >On 31/05/2010 1:54 PM, Robert Baer wrote: >> No real estate restrictions but do not need much panel area to light a >> small room. > >I'd just open the curtains myself. --- Where I live, sometimes it gets dark outside.
From: Sylvia Else on 31 May 2010 08:52
On 31/05/2010 10:43 PM, John Fields wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:25:27 +1000, Sylvia Else > <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: > >> On 31/05/2010 1:54 PM, Robert Baer wrote: > >>> No real estate restrictions but do not need much panel area to light a >>> small room. >> >> I'd just open the curtains myself. > > --- > Where I live, sometimes it gets dark outside. > Yes, but I find that solar panels don't work too well then anyway. Sylvia. |