Your estimate is low.
Note that these are average values from the entire year. Peaks are far higher. Click pic to enlarge.
Your estimate is low.
Note that these are average values from the entire year. Peaks are far higher. Click pic to enlarge.
While my estimate was “back of the envelope” your map is for a “Two-Axis Tracking Concentrator”. Windows don't track the sun. They don't concentrate the sun's energy. Without tracking, and without even optimal South-facing orientation, my estimate is probably generous. Only one quarter of the windows on a simplified home are South-facing. They will only be roughly oriented toward the sun in the morning and late in the afternoon when light passing through the atmosphere obliquely has already lost much of its energy to atmospheric absorption.
Bottom line: My estimate is high. Take the mid-range of idealized tracking concentrators (these are reflecting windows, not concentrator), 5 KWHrs for about 6 hours giving about 800 watts M-squared (hardly ever happens, but let's use it) divided by 4, assuming a South-facing wall, and, divided by 3 again since less than 2 hours of the 6 are directly incident, giving us about 260 watts, using the cosine of the angle between the sun's elevation to the perpendicular to the window brings you to 130 watts. Then, the reality of atmospheric absorption at low angles, which absorb about half the energy for modest atmospheric water content will bring the real energy available for conversion to electricity to about 65 Watts. Assume ten percent conversion efficiency, which is probably fair - 6.5 watts per square meter.
Without tracking there is little point. But perhaps we could provide tax incentives, or even have the EPA require that all future houses be mounted on gimbals allowing one wall with windows to be moved so to track the sun and our problem is solved!
I had to go through these details to be dissuaded from my idealistic notion of renewable solar energy while in graduate school. I also came to recognize the sad reality of research guided by the latest darling of the political class. Government funding of scientific research has helped to hinder legitimate research in many areas. Just look at climate science. Medicine is a mess. Look at Aids research, and the wonder discovery of the month, which is never heard from again, funded by our tax dollars. Cary Mullis, Nobel for PCR used to detect real virus, discovered that he could be paid for not lecturing about the truth - there is no evidence of a causal relationship between HIV and Aids. But we spend over ten billion a year to keep biochemists busy on what is very likely a wild goose chase. Politicians get plenty of support for their re-election campaigns, and for their compassion. Renewable energy is as good a scam as Aids research, and perhaps better if the can ram cap-and-trade down the throats of the gullible.
The materials science technology does look interesting, but its application is almost worthless. Now if the technology could be used for remote highway emergency phones, or for some other low power, high value application, it could make sense. But as our government's economy is being destroyed our radical left, universities will write proposals the radicals might approve so our grad students have some funding.
Our scientists and engineers are moving back to the countries some of them escaped, and from which some immigrated, Russia, China. I'm urging my children to learn Mandarin or Spanish (Chile), or French (Canada). Those in charge are destroying capitalism by having so many working in the nonproductive sector - government, and so many not working at all. There is no way to support so many non-workers, and no reason to swear allegiance to a country where individual rights are no longer protected by a Constitution.