Posted on 11/25/2008 12:19:00 AM PST by neverdem
so then if more of the suns heat is trapped into the solar cell as opposed to reflecting from the earth and back out to space, then are solar cells really prevent the planet from global warming?
Heh never mind. At least someone did!
Good news all round I would think.
I saw a show recently on either Nat Geo, or The Science Channel that was all about "alternative Green" energy.
IIRC, when the show talked about "solar energy", it was shown that as long as "solar cells have been around (say at least 20-30 years) that the come from somewhere in Europe, and that they have managed to get a solar cell that ACTUALLY can gather and use up to and astonashing EIGHTTEEN PERCENT of the sun's energy that hits it!!!!!!!!!
Hmmm....so if these folks have increased that 18% by 50%........WOW boys and girls!!!! We've managed in 30 years to finally get a solar cell to use almost 28% of the frickin' sun's energy that hits it!!!!!!!!!
NOW I know why the dems don't wanna bother drillin' no place!!!!!!!!!!!
How many of these cells will it take to power my 8500 BTU
air cinditioner?
I live in the mid west sun only appear every now and then.
Do you know how much havoc it can cause to suck nearly 30% of the available solar energy out of the climate sustem?
DOOOoooooom!
We must ban solar NOW....
We’ve already done in oil; coal nearly so; nukes is dead; wind kills bats & birds, and causes imaginary syndromes....
Yah-hah-ha! We’ll have these capitlist creeps back in caves eating raw veggies before they know waht hit’m, boys!
IIRC, you like this stuff.
"I live in the mid west sun only appear every now and then."
Just one.
(...but it will probably have to be the size of the WHOLE mid-west...)
Only in the computer.
Actual manufacturing costs would increase 1500%.
yitbos
:}
Well let’s say it is 28% efficient (I don’t know what it really is). Here in central California the sun’s energy is about 720 watts per square meter on average for 6 hours a day in the summer. 28% of that is about 202 watts generated per square meter for 6 hours a day. So that’s about 1.21 kWh of electricity per day per square meter.
That 8500 BTU air conditioner should take about 950 watts to operate depending on its efficiency. If it is on (that is actually running) approximately 20% of the day it should take about 4.56 kWh of electricity each day.
Therefore it would take about 4.2 square meters (or a little less than 7 feet by 7 feet) of these cells to generate the needed energy to power a 8500 BTU air conditioner including a 10% loss getting from DC to AC.
And the sun shines for more than 6 hours a day here.
Actually, these are thin-film photovoltaics and the thin-film solutions are only in the 8%-12% efficiency range. Those using polysilicon are in the high-teens with the best being from SunPower at 22%-23%. Poly versus thin-films are apples & oranges!
ping for later
Solar power is, and always will be, a supplement to existing energy sources. As long as that limitation is realised, an increase to 28% efficiency is great news. It isnt going to solve the energy crisis, not by any means, but it might ease it a bit.
This is great newz for General Motors! — after their bailout, when Congress is designing the cars they have to build, then their solar-powered car that no one wants to buy, will go an extra 10 feet before sputtering to a stop.
And I can’t wait for the Tahoe powered by a windmill on the roof. That will be really bitchin!
Thanks!
Do you still have the renewable energy ping list?
Please Freep Mail me if you'd like on/off
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.