Solar panel efficency
in [Design]
|
From: Archimedes' Lever on 12 Jun 2010 18:43 On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:20:49 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:44:13 -0700, Archimedes' Lever ><OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: > >>On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:22:39 -0700, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>There was/is concern over whether LEDs and microwave fets are allowed, >>>what with the arsenic in GaAs. >> >> >> That is just silly. It is a crystal and is tightly bound. > >If you read the wording of the ROHS rules, that doesn't matter. It >also doesn't matter how little GaAs is in a product. > >John So, in other words, they are *all* 'arseholes'. If that is the case, they need to all ban themselves. I should do stand up.
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 12 Jun 2010 20:13 On 12/06/2010 23:43, Archimedes' Lever wrote: > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:20:49 -0700, John Larkin > <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:44:13 -0700, Archimedes' Lever >> <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:22:39 -0700, John Larkin >>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>> There was/is concern over whether LEDs and microwave fets are allowed, >>>> what with the arsenic in GaAs. >>> >>> >>> That is just silly. It is a crystal and is tightly bound. >> >> If you read the wording of the ROHS rules, that doesn't matter. It >> also doesn't matter how little GaAs is in a product. >> >> John > > > So, in other words, they are *all* 'arseholes'. > > If that is the case, they need to all ban themselves. > > I should do stand up. Don't worry - the use of all these exotic metals are only a stopgap until we can do it right with quantum dots etc using carbon, silicon etc -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Archimedes' Lever on 12 Jun 2010 20:25 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 01:13:24 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On 12/06/2010 23:43, Archimedes' Lever wrote: >> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:20:49 -0700, John Larkin >> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:44:13 -0700, Archimedes' Lever >>> <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:22:39 -0700, John Larkin >>>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There was/is concern over whether LEDs and microwave fets are allowed, >>>>> what with the arsenic in GaAs. >>>> >>>> >>>> That is just silly. It is a crystal and is tightly bound. >>> >>> If you read the wording of the ROHS rules, that doesn't matter. It >>> also doesn't matter how little GaAs is in a product. >>> >>> John >> >> >> So, in other words, they are *all* 'arseholes'. >> >> If that is the case, they need to all ban themselves. >> >> I should do stand up. > >Don't worry - the use of all these exotic metals are only a stopgap >until we can do it right with quantum dots etc using carbon, silicon etc There is a guy that was featured on Discovery or such that is printing solar cells onto plastic film. Not sure, but I think nanotubes are involved. Maybe in the 'ink'. Supposed to be more efficient too.
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 12 Jun 2010 21:07 On 13/06/2010 01:25, Archimedes' Lever wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 01:13:24 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 12/06/2010 23:43, Archimedes' Lever wrote: >>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:20:49 -0700, John Larkin >>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:44:13 -0700, Archimedes' Lever >>>> <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:22:39 -0700, John Larkin >>>>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There was/is concern over whether LEDs and microwave fets are allowed, >>>>>> what with the arsenic in GaAs. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is just silly. It is a crystal and is tightly bound. >>>> >>>> If you read the wording of the ROHS rules, that doesn't matter. It >>>> also doesn't matter how little GaAs is in a product. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>> >>> So, in other words, they are *all* 'arseholes'. >>> >>> If that is the case, they need to all ban themselves. >>> >>> I should do stand up. >> >> Don't worry - the use of all these exotic metals are only a stopgap >> until we can do it right with quantum dots etc using carbon, silicon etc > > There is a guy that was featured on Discovery or such that is printing > solar cells onto plastic film. > > Not sure, but I think nanotubes are involved. Maybe in the 'ink'. > > Supposed to be more efficient too. Nanosolar - see my previous posts in this thread. The transparent conductor on top typically uses (IIRC) Indium Oxide, but will likley be replaced in the near future with graphene -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Bill Bowden on 12 Jun 2010 22:27
On Jun 12, 1:03 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 20:44:09 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > > > > <dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On 12/06/2010 20:41, Archimedes' Lever wrote: > >> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 20:30:34 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > >> <dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> Cadmium! Can they sell these in Europe, ROHS and all? > > >>> They probably have a "do not lick" label for litigious US tourists. > > >> Uh... RoHs is a euro thing. > > >> The US banned Cadmium in the industry years ago. More proof that the > >> whole rohs thing was a huge waste of money for the entire world. A hit > >> this industry did not need. > > >> And there are exemptions, even for Cadmium, Mercury, and Lead. They > >> are just not anywhere where contact is an imminent worry. > > >Well, I do not mourn NiCd batteries. > > NiCd has its place. NiMH certainly hasn't held up its promise. > > >I'll be happy when lead acid goes the same way. > > Lead-Acid (and SLA) has its place too. No one has come up with a replacement > for either one. How about Li-ion? is that bad or just too expensive? They don't seem to have much self discharge, and absorb almost all the energy used to charge them. -Bill |