Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Solar Cell Surpasses 40 Percent Efficiency~ (NREL) verified the milestone.
Boeing ^ | Dec. 06, 2006 | Boeing Press Release

Posted on 12/06/2006 2:28:44 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

ST. LOUIS, Dec. 06, 2006 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] today announced that Spectrolab, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary, has achieved a new world record in terrestrial concentrator solar cell efficiency. Using concentrated sunlight, Spectrolab demonstrated the ability of a photovoltaic cell to convert 40.7 percent of the sun's energy into electricity. The U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colo., verified the milestone.

"This solar cell performance is the highest efficiency level any photovoltaic device has ever achieved," said Dr. David Lillington, president of Spectrolab. "The terrestrial cell we have developed uses the same technology base as our space-based cells. So, once qualified, they can be manufactured in very high volumes with minimal impact to production flow."

High efficiency multijunction cells have a significant advantage over conventional silicon cells in concentrator systems because fewer solar cells are required to achieve the same power output. This technology will continue to dramatically reduce the cost of generating electricity from solar energy as well as the cost of materials used in high-power space satellites and terrestrial applications.

"These results are particularly encouraging since they were achieved using a new class of metamorphic semiconductor materials, allowing much greater freedom in multijunction cell design for optimal conversion of the solar spectrum," said Dr. Richard R. King, principal investigator of the high efficiency solar cell research and development effort. "The excellent performance of these materials hints at still higher efficiency in future solar cells."

Spectrolab is reducing the cost of solar cell production through research investments and is working with several domestic and international solar concentrator manufacturers on clean, renewable solar energy solutions. Currently, Spectrolab's terrestrial concentrator cells are generating power in a 33-kilowatt full-scale concentrator system in the Australian desert. The company recently signed multi-million dollar contracts for its high efficiency concentrator cells and is anticipating several new contracts in the next few months.

Development of the high-efficiency concentrator cell technology was funded by the NREL's High Performance Photovoltaics program and Spectrolab.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events; Technical; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: boeing; energy; nrel; photovoltaics; solar; solarcell; solarenergy; solarpower; spectrolab
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 12/06/2006 2:28:44 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

...great progress!


2 posted on 12/06/2006 2:32:52 PM PST by Van Jenerette (U.S.Army 1967-1991 Infantry OCS, Hall of Fame, Ft. Benning Ga.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This is very good news, Ernest.

3 posted on 12/06/2006 2:33:11 PM PST by bd476
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Cost is the vital factor.


4 posted on 12/06/2006 2:36:22 PM PST by RightWhale (RTRA DLQS GSCW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

40% is very high.


5 posted on 12/06/2006 2:37:51 PM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( If you mention a freeper in a post, ping them, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

6 posted on 12/06/2006 2:38:08 PM PST by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; annie laurie; AntiGuv

ping.


7 posted on 12/06/2006 2:38:16 PM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( If you mention a freeper in a post, ping them, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE

Excellent news.


8 posted on 12/06/2006 2:40:31 PM PST by patton (Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Could someone put this into practical terms? Could we heat a home or charge a car or what and for how much?


9 posted on 12/06/2006 2:53:57 PM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
Currently, Spectrolab's terrestrial concentrator cells are generating power in a 33-kilowatt full-scale concentrator system in the Australian desert.
10 posted on 12/06/2006 2:56:49 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; patton

Good news.

Not for everybody, not for all cases, but it is good news.

(Of course, the enviro libs will claim that now (immediately, right away) we can run a steel mill, a shipyard, and a powerplant (in Seattle, under the cloud cover, at night, during winter) from these things.....)

8<)


11 posted on 12/06/2006 3:02:00 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad

It's 40% efficient at gathering the Solar Constant and I'll bet you've never heard of that value. 1.35 kW m^2 or 3.171 x 10^2 Btu h^-1 ft^-2

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns. NRA KMA Merry Christmas


12 posted on 12/06/2006 3:03:23 PM PST by dhuffman@awod.com (The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad

Solar cell roof panels and so on are now available that will supply the average home with power to run all our toys provided the system is part of the mortgage package.
Finannng a solar system at 5 0r 6 percent apr via home mortgage versus financing the same system through personal loans or credit cards at 14 percent plus makes the difference.
I doubt many home lenders are ready to do this.
Many obscure regulations probably exist barring the batteries needed for one thing;neither lead nor cadmium or supposed to be in homes in many cities.

We are really a nation of laws now;too darn many if you ask me.


13 posted on 12/06/2006 3:09:59 PM PST by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will you take a creditcard?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Well, there is that...LOL


14 posted on 12/06/2006 3:12:52 PM PST by patton (Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Gives me hope we can stop shipping so much money to the Middle Eastern despots and jihadists who vow to make us submit to them.


15 posted on 12/06/2006 3:13:16 PM PST by PC99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham

I have a question about going through a converter straight into the house, or the electricity web if you house does not use the electricity. The question, is it feasible, or are the batteries and the loss associated with the power going into and out of the batteries still a requirement?


16 posted on 12/06/2006 3:15:08 PM PST by thinkthenpost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
OK.

Figure it this way.

(Everything depends on your location (higher latitude = less solar incident rays per sq meter than a southern desert test site near Mexico), weather = (compared to a cloudless desert!) will ALWAYS mean you can never get as much power as at this test site , altitude + humidity (anything in the air reduces incident rays on the panel), cleanliness (any dirt or pollution or dust on the surface or in the air reduces incident sunlight.) If you have nearby buildings or trees, they reduce by shading the effective area of the sun's arc that you get usable exposure. If you aren't exposed directly to the south facing sun's arc through the sky all day, you get no power. For me, almost all of my roof is shaded almost all of the day, so I get power only from 11:00 to 1:30 in summer. Less in winter.

They are using a collector (or mirror-like concentrator) so the actual roof area req'd is bigger than the solar area of the cell. So, if your roof was 30 ft x 50 ft, you could cover the entire roof with the concentrator, but the actual cell are might be 50-25% of the collector area.

OK. So this was ideal test site conditions. The news is good (to solar enthusiasts) because previous efficiencies couldn't get over 7-15% in routine production of clean cells, and 20-32% under ideal conditions.

using nominal values, to actually run your a one-story average house from the sun from 9:00 - 3:30 (the maximum actual hours the sun is usably producing power!), you need a cell area about the size of 1/4 - 1/3 your roof - assuming the whole roof faces south at the right angle. To run the house (with "usual" electric loads!) from 6:00 AM to 6:00 pm, you need to add batteries, a DC-AC converter, solar controller (needed anyway really) and a battery system charge controller.

OK. All those converters and controllers reduce efficiency - since you're pulling power from the batteries for half the time, and charging the battery half the time. So you need just about the half the roof to run your house half the day - during daylight hours.

To run solar full time, double the area (less electric power is used at night, but during part of the night almost all of the loads are off. Making up is the greater drain on the batteries and less efficiency of the solar-battery-chemical-DC-to AC conversions.... Daytime hours, much of the solar input doesn't need to get reconverted to battery chemical power first. It's used immediately.

AWhat most (almost all!) solar users do is really eliminate almost all of their electric loads: no AC, high efficiency motors, lights, fewer lights, TV, no instant-on appliances, high efficiency refrigerators, etc, etc. All of these cost a LOT more.

The usual figure for planning is to allow for 4 cloudy and lost days for the storage cvapcaity. That much capacity adds more solar bank req'd to charge it and keep it up - not a lot, but a bunch.

Solar is really only practical (for houses!) where the site is so far from the grid that lines (at 10,000 per mile, if not more) are so expensive that the 25,000 investment is "rational" ....

It makes a nice demo. But you can't run much right now.
17 posted on 12/06/2006 3:25:10 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Currently, Spectrolab's terrestrial concentrator cells are generating power in a 33-kilowatt full-scale concentrator system in the Australian desert.

"Standard test conditions" for solar energy are 1000 watts per square meter, so you'd need about 83 square meters to produce 33 KW at 40% efficiency, or a 9 m by 9 m array of mirrors and collectors, plus the control capability to keep it pointing at the sun. I'm guessing this would provide the air conditioning power for about 4 or 5 homes in the Australian (or Arizona desert), so Phoenix would need about a quarter million of these things to replace the power required for home air conditioning.

18 posted on 12/06/2006 3:25:50 PM PST by AZLiberty (Wanting to die for your beliefs? Good, because we're willing to kill for ours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dhuffman@awod.com

It's 40% efficient at gathering the Solar Constant and I'll bet you've never heard of that value.

I might of if I had paid any attention in school.

Either we are equal or we are not.


I think I'm more than equal, thanks to Gaston Glock!


19 posted on 12/06/2006 3:27:09 PM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: thinkthenpost
Think of running directly from a converter as hooking your sink up to a tee from a 1" firehose that somebody else keeps turning on and off. (Clouds cover the sun for a few minutes, for example. Your oven and the AC start at the same time, etc.)

IF (big if) you're using more power than the cell is providing all the time, then you're more or less balanced: both the grid and the solar cells (via the AC converter) are providing power.

But the random nature of the loads, and the power available from the converter really make it much better to have a battery charger and 2-4 batteries on-line constantly to balance and stabilize the system. Less surges, less up-and-down in current. The charge controller charges the battery when AC loads go down, or pulls power from the battery when AC loads go up, or when available solar power reduces suddenly.

But there's nothing to balance the system if there's no battery.
20 posted on 12/06/2006 3:32:15 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

You're right. The cells in this article are for special applications.


21 posted on 12/06/2006 3:32:25 PM PST by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thinkthenpost

So-called grid intertie systems are way cheaper because of no batteries.
You can also sell or share power but if the grid goes down,your converter shuts off (or at least disconnects from the grid).Big problem if the sun isn't shining on your panels right then!
Grid intertie systems MUST stop sending power to the utility wires in case of any problem lest the line repairman be killied by your power.And it takes less electricity than you might think to kill a person.
I prefer a system with storage or at least alternate generator capabilty.


22 posted on 12/06/2006 3:35:01 PM PST by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will you take a creditcard?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

You are "Mister Wizard". Oh, I might be dumb in math and science, but I do know the P.E. doesn't stand for "Physical Education". Thanks


23 posted on 12/06/2006 3:35:36 PM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Thanks for putting it better than I did;do you read Homepower,etc?

Anyone interested in this topic should go to Homepower website where you can download a sample issue of the magazine and various topical bulletins. THey have years of experience .WArning to the rigid-minded:the viewpoints tend to be socialist.I don't let that stop me from using the good info .


24 posted on 12/06/2006 3:43:11 PM PST by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will you take a creditcard?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
No big deal.


Solar "constant" is an ideal measure: treat it as if it were the ideal solar power theoretically available at your location at the instant of high noon. (In space, a 1 sq meter solar cell aimed directly at the sun receives 1.0 solar constant of power. Note that I said "receives" the solar constant. It can't turn all of that power into anything useful either!)

So, in our real world of dirty collectors and moving suns and clouds and dust and reflections from the face of the collectors and .....

...

http://www.glumac.com/section.asp?catid=140&subid=152&pageid=533

This article gives some "real world" efficiencies and terms:

The sun produces light at a fairly constant rate. The energy contained within that light is represented as the solar constant. The solar constant is 1353 watts per square meter in space and about 1000 watts per square meter (95 watts per square foot) at sea level at the equator at solar noon.

Photovoltaics (PV) is a solid-state technology that converts solar radiation directly into electrical power, with no moving parts, requiring no fuel, and creating virtually no pollutants over its life cycle. As long as the sun is shining, energy can be developed directly by use of a PV module.

The PV effect is the physical phenomenon of converting light directly into electricity. Edmund Becquerel, a French physicist, first observed this phenomenon in 1839. He discovered that illuminating one of two electrodes in a weak solution produced a voltage. During the 1880s, the first PV cells were made from selenium. These preliminary cells operated with a conversion efficiency of 1-2%.

New photovoltaic technology was developed to power satellites, as part of the space program in the 1960's. In addition, advancement in the transistor industry provided for better materials. PVs and transistors are made from similar materials and many of their working principles are determined by the same physical mechanisms.

Today’s PVs are made from silicon, similar to semiconductors. Through a process called doping, the silicon is separated into two distinct layers, called negative (n-type) and positive (p-type.) The n-type has an excess of electrons, and the p-type has vacancies or missing electrons. The two layers are separated by a n-p junction.

Light passes through the thin n-silicon layer and hits the p-silicon layer. The light is absorbed by the p-silicon layer. The photons in light displace the electrons in the p layer. Some of these displaced electrons have sufficient energy to pass through the n-p junction to the n layer. A potential is developed between the n and p layers. For silicon, this potential is approximately one-half volt. By connecting the n and p layers through wires and a load, current (electrons) can flow from the negative layer back to the positive layer. The electrons which have returned to the positive layer, are once again available for displacement, resulting in a completely renewable resource.

Photovoltaic Cell Crystalline Solar Cell

Single crystal silicon cells have a theoretical efficiency of 29%. The maximum efficiency achieved in a laboratory was approximately 24%. Single crystal silicon cells are not commercially viable to mass produce.

Poly-crystal silicon cells are the most popular of the PV cells on the market today. The cells are widely used in calculators, watches, landscape lighting, etc. The cells are relatively easy and cheap to manufacture with little loss in efficiency over the single crystal cells. Typically, the poly-crystal cells on the market today reach a maximum of 15% efficiency. The general rule of thumb is to figure a net of 10 watts per square foot of solar array surface area.

The major disadvantage of the poly-crystal cells is the wasted materials in the manufacturing process. The poly-crystal silicon is cast and sliced into thin silicon wafers. During the slicing process, almost half of the raw silicon is lost.

Thin-film Cell

In order to lower the manufacturing costs, a thin-film solar cell was developed. The thin-film method uses less material and makes available a more automated manufacturing process. In addition, the thin-film can be incorporated into many building materials and applications.

The big disadvantage to the thin-film cells is their relatively low efficiency. However, as more applications are available, more surface areas are utilized for PV production, offsetting the lowered efficiency. Typically, the efficiency of the thin-film PV cell would be approximately 8% or about seven watts per square foot. The film can be applied to roofing materials, siding, etc. The film can also be applied to skylights and perforated with a laser to achieve the desired light transmission.

The various PV panels would be interconnected through series/parallel connections to develop the desired voltages and currents. No maintenance is required for the PV panels. Having been designed for the rigorous demands in space, PV modules can withstand high temperatures, and direct impact from rocks or other projectiles.
25 posted on 12/06/2006 3:47:12 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham
100 milliamps IRC, a number easy to reach.
26 posted on 12/06/2006 3:52:12 PM PST by thinkthenpost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad

I prefer Messrs. Heckler and Koch's compact Universal Selfloading Pistol in .40

But the epigraph refers to the supposed differences between various citizens, like legislators, cops and felons.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns. NRA KMA Merry Christmas


27 posted on 12/06/2006 4:25:34 PM PST by dhuffman@awod.com (The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
40% is very high

Once you have achieved 40%, the game then becomes how cheaply can you make them and still maintain the efficiency.

The Total Cost of Ownership for solar power has as main components

  1. Capital cost of the solar cells
  2. Cost of the real estate they occupy
  3. Depreciation (how long do they last before they need to be replaced)
  4. Operation (Washing the dirt and bird droppings off them so the sunlight can get thru)

28 posted on 12/06/2006 4:26:03 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The fine print from spectrolab's web site:

How does a concentrator system lower the cost of solar energy: Under 500-sun concentration, for example, one square centimeter of solar cell area produces the same electricity as 500 cm2 would without concentration. The use of concentration, therefore, enables the replacement of the more expensive semiconductor area with cheaper materials (e.g., lenses or mirrors). The use of concentration, however, requires that the module use a dual-axis tracking system, in addition to providing an efficient heat removal mechanism. Still, the savings in the semiconductor area and the higher output due to the use of the higher cell efficiency make the use of HCPV modules with MJ cells more economical.
29 posted on 12/06/2006 4:26:58 PM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thinkthenpost

http://www.homepower.org

Look through this publication for a lot of information


30 posted on 12/06/2006 4:32:03 PM PST by UB355 (Slower traffic keep right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; cogitator

Sounds good to me!


31 posted on 12/06/2006 4:34:04 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Dont overestimate the decency of the human race. H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dhuffman@awod.com

I've got a "little" HK Mark 23 if we're talking H&K's, actually I gave it to my son.



32 posted on 12/06/2006 4:36:10 PM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dr_who_2

I need to find a picture of that appartus the DOE had set up outside of Barstow...


33 posted on 12/06/2006 4:36:17 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dr_who_2
Concentrating Solar Power

This is about the Large setup at Kramer's Junction,....west of Barstow.


34 posted on 12/06/2006 4:41:11 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dhuffman@awod.com

H&K USP Tactical in .45


35 posted on 12/06/2006 4:50:37 PM PST by mountn man (The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor

ummmm ....you forgot the real biggie. Energy storage, that means batteries. And that to the real estate as well as control circuitry. Last time I looked that doubled the installation cost. Imagine the user disposal fees(taxes) that will be imposed once the storage batteries come to the end of ttheir life span


36 posted on 12/06/2006 5:00:25 PM PST by Covenantor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: UB355

Homepower Magazine has good reference information in their archives. I used part of it to design, buy and install my off-grid PV system. But their editorial policy is as left wing as a $3 bill.


37 posted on 12/06/2006 5:03:18 PM PST by plymaniac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Bet they would work good on the moon and mars.


38 posted on 12/06/2006 5:43:31 PM PST by G-Man 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
The price per watt is still probably high, but this is a huge improvement. The average solar cells people have on their roofs now are only about ten to fifteen percent efficient if they've purchased them in recent years, worse if older. Cells with efficiency of 10% will produce about a hundred watts of power per square meter during peak sunlight hours. Sunlight at ground level is supposedly the equivalent of one kilowatt of electricity per square meter. Panels that are 100% efficient would generate one kilowatt per square meter during peak sun hours, or something like five or six kilowatt hours per day depending on how much sun they get in the area where the panels are set up. Cells that are 40% efficient would then put out around 400 watts per square meter during peak sun hours. That means with 40% efficient panels we can produce four times as much power per square meter of panels than we would get with standard 10% efficient panels still common today. It probably also means a reduction in price, since less materials will be necessary to set up the two or three or more kilowatts worth of solar panels people like to set up for home power. Costs for solar panels and other equipment you need to set up a solar power system for your home have slowly but surely been going down, and efficiency of the panels is going up. Big strides in efficiency like this hasten the day when solar power systems will be providing a big part of the electricity homes and businesses need. It will be a while before that happens but in the mean time you're going to see more and more solar power being utilized for small gadgets, remote equipment that needs power, maybe cheap solar panels for your work truck to keep your power tools charged, and so on. I remember being amazed by solar powered calculators, and things like the solar powered school zone signs with the flashing lights, and seeing solar panels at gas wells. As efficiency improves and price goes down we'll see a lot more innovative uses for solar power in addition to seeing more solar panels on homes and businesses for supplementing power from the grid.
39 posted on 12/06/2006 6:38:55 PM PST by TKDietz (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: G-Man 1; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; RightWhale
"Bet they would work good on the moon and mars."

The problem on the Moon is the long period of darkness. That's why NASA is now talking about landing at the Lunar poles. The Moon has a flatter orbit than Earth's, and a simple tower will elevate your solar collector into the sunshine -- 24 hour sunshine.

On Mars, one again has an approximately twenty-four hour day, generally clearer atmosphere, but weaker sunlight. The mirrors would have to be larger, in order to concentrate more.

40 posted on 12/06/2006 6:58:32 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Some people reach their level of incompetence when doing household chores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

We're getting there. Oh, until the day when we can collectively moon the Middle East.


41 posted on 12/06/2006 7:01:47 PM PST by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I worked for Spectrolab in the early 80's
This is very high.


42 posted on 12/06/2006 7:05:01 PM PST by calljack (Sometimes your worst nightmare is just a start.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
moon the Middle East.

I like that~!

43 posted on 12/06/2006 7:46:15 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob
Dust on Mars?

If at the Moon, very close to (if not directly under) the pole, the receiver would need to "counter-rotate" against the moon's rotation and angular tilt, right?
44 posted on 12/06/2006 9:34:35 PM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
"... the receiver would need to "counter-rotate" against the moon's rotation and angular tilt, right?"

The moon's angular tilt is surprisingly small. Yes, the receiver, whether solar cells or solar dynamic, would have to track to follow the sun. A simple photocell-activated clock motor would suffice.

Dust on Mars would be a problem. I would design arrays that could fold up to shield from storms, and a robot arm would be needed for dusting. To avoid such complexities, simple flat arrays may be preferable, with solar cells made of local materials.

45 posted on 12/06/2006 9:53:23 PM PST by NicknamedBob (Some people reach their level of incompetence when doing household chores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

You CAN...in Seattle, under cloud cover, at night...just put the solar cells where they SHOULD be - IN SPACE - then BEAM the energy back to those steel mills, shipyards et al in Seattle and elsewhere; solar power satellites receive full sunlight 24/7/365 in perpetuity.


46 posted on 12/07/2006 1:02:19 AM PST by FYREDEUS (FYREDEUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FYREDEUS

*sings*

Oh, give me a locus where the gravitons focus
Where the three-body problem is solved,
Where the microwaves play down at three degrees K,
And the cold virus never evolved.

Home, home on LaGrange,
Where the space debris always collects,
We possess, so it seems, two of Man's greatest dreams:
Solar power and zero-gee sex.

We eat algae pie, our vacuum is high,
Our ball bearings are perfectly round.
Our horizon is curved, our warheads are MIRVed,
And a kilogram weighs half a pound.

Home, home on LaGrange,
Where the space debris always collects,
We possess, so it seems, two of Man's greatest dreams:
Solar power and zero-gee sex.

If we run out of space for our burgeoning race
No more Lebensraum left for the Mensch
When we're ready to start, we can take Mars apart,
If we just find a big enough wrench.

Home, home on LaGrange,
Where the space debris always collects,
We possess, so it seems, two of Man's greatest dreams:
Solar power and zero-gee sex.

I'm sick of this place, it's just McDonald's in space,
And living up here is a bore.
Tell the shiggies, "Don't cry," they can kiss me goodbye
'Cause I'm moving next week to L4!

Home, home on LaGrange,
Where the space debris always collects,
We possess, so it seems, two of Man's greatest dreams:
Solar power and zero-gee sex.


47 posted on 12/07/2006 1:10:52 AM PST by FYREDEUS (FYREDEUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad; Robert A. Cook, PE

Where solar can have biggest impact on energy usage is air conditioning during the summer.

Also note the multijunction flexible product put out by 'UniSolar':

http://www.uni-solar.com/index.asp

They put out a flexible peel and stock roll (feels like linoleum) that can easily confrom to almost any roof. They also put out a shingle product. They presently warrantee their product for 25 years.

In the solar biz, the weakest link is the AC-DC Converter, but they are getting better with longer warranties (> 5 years to now greater than 10 years).

Batteries are a problem in more ways then one.

But looking at grid loads during the summer, air conditioning is a huge percentage of load and if solar systems can take up that load, then oil and other fossil fuel markets will definitely feel it.


48 posted on 12/07/2006 1:56:33 AM PST by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FYREDEUS

!


49 posted on 12/07/2006 6:19:28 AM PST by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

Thanks for the ping :)


50 posted on 12/07/2006 6:08:56 PM PST by annie laurie (All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson