Solar Forehead Slap

[jneal3]

Wow, trees have evolved to be the most efficient at collecting sunlight...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...through/41486/

I swear, human insight is the single most powerful and inspirational force in the universe. And also the reason to be forever humble.

[LargoWinch]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Wow, trees have evolved to be the most efficient at collecting sunlight...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...through/41486/

I swear, human insight is the single most powerful and inspirational force in the universe. And also the reason to be forever humble.

Brilliant.

[c1ue]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Posted in Energy forum. This type of innovation is exactly what the rush to subsidize 1st generation solar systems causes people to miss.

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...405#post206405

[Starving Steve]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Another joke about solar, and including your solar tree, is that the Sun's rays at solar noon are much, much, MUCH stronger than the Sun's rays in the early morning and in the late afternoon. So, the 2 calories of energy per cm^2 per minute (at the top of the Earth's atmosphere) is MUCH LOWER in the late afternoon and the early morning.

Let's discuss this joke a bit more: The 2 calories per cm^2 per minute is more like 1 cal. per cm^2 per min. at the Earth's surface at solar noon. Also, this is the solar maximum output during high summer; the solar output is much MUCH less during other seasons at the surface of the Earth. During low sun-angle times of day and months of the year, solar rays have to travel through much more atmosphere, so the rays are diminished to zero. At such times, even if solar panels are perpendicular to the Sun's rays, the energy received is MINIMAL.

And then, there is the problem of clouds, building shadows, tree shadows, mountain shadows, dust dispersion of solar energy, and the small but IMPORTANT problem of humidity in the Earth's atmosphere absorbing solar energy and preventing the energy from reaching the Earth's surface.

And no-one hired me, because they didn't think geographers knew anything. When I told the truth about solar energy as being a joke, they sent me home. Interview over! Now here we are in 2011, and the western world is in sharp decline because no-one wanted to hear the truth about solar..... How many billions of dollars have been wasted on solar fantasies?

Let's tell the truth. The California golden poppy opens its pedals to receive solar energy during the day, but for most of the day, the poppies are closed-up because there is too little solar energy to even bother with. And on cloudy days, California poppies never open, not even at solar noon. The golden poppies tell the story, better than I could ever tell it.

And mankind does not have the energy need of tiny golden poppies. We need cheap, abundant, and dependable power, and that means nuclear, hydro-electric, natural-gas, and coal........ Otherwise, our standard of living will continue to decline, and we will become turd world.

LEAN FORWARD

[c1ue]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Steve, you really need to get off the 2 calorie wagon. It is wrong.

As for poppies - the flowers don't photosynthesize. They close because there's no point being open for business when the pollinators aren't moving much.

It isn't that solar can never be affordable; there is potential there.

It is that the subsidies for 1st generation technology are wrong, and the assumption that solar PV can replace other forms of power generation are equally wrong.

There are, however, definitely areas where solar PV can be of benefit.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Yes, solar power is good for solar lights on a walkway or a driveway. Another use for solar could be on top of your sailboat or maybe your rowboat. Solar lights might be good for bridge spans so that boats might not collide with the bridge. Runway lights at rural airports could be solar, too. And, sad to say, that is about the gamit of solar photo-voltaic uses that make sense economically....

What a joke!

[Starving Steve]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

From the Motley Fool on August 18th, Evergreen Solar is going bankrupt. They may be the first of the solar dominos to fall. Ascent Solar may be next to fall. Canadian Solar could be next?

Not only is solar a dumb idea and its economics insane, but China is now selling solar silicon chips at 1/3 the price of solar silicon chips made in the U.S. or the rest of the world..... So good-bye to the solar manufacturing jobs, at least outside of China.

But not to despair, there will remain jobs for solar system sales-people, and reminiscent of the jobs for lightening-rod salesmen during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

[santafe2]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Wow, trees have evolved to be the most efficient at collecting sunlight...

Trees are very efficient at gathering energy but I'm sorry, this story is a bit silly.

[santafe2]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

From the Motley Fool on August 18th, Evergreen Solar is going bankrupt. They may be the first of the solar dominos to fall. Ascent Solar may be next to fall. Canadian Solar could be next?

Not only is solar a dumb idea and its economics insane, but China is now selling solar silicon chips at 1/3 the price of solar silicon chips made in the U.S. or the rest of the world..... So good-bye to the solar manufacturing jobs, at least outside of China.

But not to despair, there will remain jobs for solar system sales-people, and reminiscent of the jobs for lightening-rod salesmen during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Solar manufacturers will not have a great year or two. I've commented on Evergreen several times over the last several years. They are a special case. Canadian Solar is less Canadian than I am, but very unlikely to go out of business any time soon.

China does not sell anything for 1/3 of other countries. "Chips" are not a thing sold in our business. I do think PepsiCo sells chips. The largest seller of wafers is China's LDK. They sell at maybe 5% below their competitors. They are vertically integrated and one of our partners.

There will be serious consolidation in the PV business over the next year or so but that is what happens in fast growing, new businesses.

[Chomsky]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Whole thing has been debunked.

Blog Debunks 13-Year-Old Scientist's Solar Power Breakthrough

Ujala Sehgal Aug 20, 2011 46,400 Views Comments (52)


A 13-year-old who, observing trees, takes it upon himself to read up on the Fibonacci series and propose a way to better utilize solar energy is the feel-good story at its finest. So naturally, media outlets including us have been sharing the tale of seventh grader Aidan Dwyer's solar power "breakthrough" science project. But according to the blog The Capacity Factor, the media has been getting way ahead of itself.


In short, here is the story of young Dwyer's science finding: He was observing trees, and noticed how the branches held a spiral pattern, and wondered what would be the use of that. Looking at the Fibonacci series, which describes spirals, he also noticed that tree leaves adhered to the spiral sequence. This led him to propose arranging solar panels like oak trees leaves, a manner which would be 20 to 50 percent more efficient, energy-wise. The American Museum of Natural History rewarded him with a Young Naturalist award.


So far, so great. But The Capacity Factor, clearly unhappy with its role of the Grinch who must squash an adolescent's science discovery, has written a post called "In which hopelessly inept journalists reduce me to having to debunk a school science project." (The post as of this moment is temporarily unavailable, though we link to the cache.) The post indicates about Dwyer's discovery: "This is, I'm sad to say, clear nonsense. I'll take this in two parts: one, why his experiment is, unfortunately, completely broken (sorry again). Two, why the imagined result is impossible nonsense."


Part one: "Broken Experiment."

Most importantly, by mistake he did not measure power outputs from the solar cells. Instead he measured voltage, without a load attached ("open circuit"). They are barely related -- in solar cells, voltage is actually almost a constant, independent of power.

Demonstrating the difference with a series of equations and graphs, it comes to this conclusion: "End result: measuring the solar cells' [open-circuit voltage] over time, and adding them up, is garbage data, and has nothing to do with energy production."


Part two: "Unreasonably Theory."

The blog also indicates that the theory behind the discovery itself is problematic: "I'm not sure I understand the confusion by which people think there could be some advantage, to orienting panels at sub-optimal angles. That somehow combining sub-optimal panels, together, makes them generate more energy in the net." It then goes to demonstrate via equations that "if the individual angles in the 'tree' are worse then the 45°-tilted south-facing panels in the flat array (they obviously are), so is their combination."


Finger-pointing: It's not the seventh grader's fault, it's the media's fault.

The blog does not blame the seventh grader for imperfect science, but actually the news media for blowing up this story and putting a 13-year-old into the spotlight for an impressively ambitious but unfortunately incorrect claim. It ends with this open question: "How did this confused science project became international news?"
If there's any further scientific analysis that should be taken into account here, please let us know.


http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...through/41520/

[cpnscarlet]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Whole thing has been debunked.

Blog Debunks 13-Year-Old Scientist's Solar Power Breakthrough

Ujala Sehgal Aug 20, 2011 46,400 Views Comments (52)


So far, so great. But The Capacity Factor, clearly unhappy with its role of the Grinch who must squash an adolescent's science discovery, has written a post called "In which hopelessly inept journalists reduce me to having to debunk a school science project." (The post as of this moment is temporarily unavailable, though we link to the cache.) The post indicates about Dwyer's discovery: "This is, I'm sad to say, clear nonsense. I'll take this in two parts: one, why his experiment is, unfortunately, completely broken (sorry again). Two, why the imagined result is impossible nonsense."


http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...through/41520/

Thanks for posting that. Big difference between voltage and power in cell output.

Solar will have its day when a cheap, high efficiency PN junction is found. Right now, there are some amazing triple-junction cells out there, but they cost a fortune and can only be justified on commercial COMSATS. Right now, the combination of solar cells and LED lighting is a winner. Just a simple comparison - the cost of a $3.50 solar landscape light from Home Depot costs as much as the low voltage copper wire needed to connect 2 conventional landscape lights 8 ft apart.

But solar to run your refrigerator or washing machine isn't a viable option YET. This is one area that looks hopeless now, but technology R&D will probably win the day eventually. It better, cause it doesn't look like we'll be replacing those coal-fired plants with nukes any time soon.

[jneal3]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Thanks for posting that.

+1. Not many things are as acutely painful as having someone else do your homework for you. I'm done.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

So, the point is that the best orientation for solar panels is perpendicular to the solar noon sunlight, and any sunlight thereafter is not worth sacrificing the solar noon perpendicular angle with. And that is precisely what the California golden poppies are saying too; after 3PM or before 9AM solar time, the golden poppies close-up tight, even in high summer, because there is not enough solar energy worthy of capture.

Past 3PM, the golden poppies are cooking supper and getting ready for bed. Before 9AM, they are waking-up and having breakfast. The poppies work a six-hour day, 9 until 3, with most of that work (capturing solar energy) happening between 11AM and 1PM solar time. All plants including trees would be working on the same schedule, and the rest of the time they just vegetate.

[goodrich4bk]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

What a joke! --- Starving Steve

The joke's on you, Steve. I'm now generating half of my electricity in sunny California and will have the cost paid off in less than 9 years, just as I turn 65. In the meantime, you'll still be up in Canada freezing your ass off. I don't like making it personal, but you're just over the top and plain flat wrong when it comes to the benefits of solar to an individual homeowner in California.

Don't get me wrong. "On paper" solar isn't yet feasible in 49 states without subsidies. But California does not deliver power based upon national averages or the cost of your nuclear, coal or hydro. It delivers power based upon fraudulent, long term power contracts courtesy of Enron. At over .30 a kw for tier 3 power from our utility (any use over 130% of baseline), my panels beat the utility's rates hands down. And that was using cell costs and utility charges from 2009 when I had them installed. Today, the cell costs are about 30% lower and the utility's charges about 20% higher, shortening my payback by 6 years even with no subsidies whatsoever.

Add to that our winter mean low tempurature in the 50's and our mean summer high tempurature in the low 80's, I'm living in paradise, particularly now that housing in a good neighborhood in California can be found for less than $120 a square foot with a 30 year mortgage at less than 5%.

But go ahead and keep on repeating the Fox News fantasy of a broken California full of flakes and nuts. I like the clean air, water and empty freeways just the way it is.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Solar Forehead Slap

Thanks for posting that. Big difference between voltage and power in cell output.

Perhaps it's time to add voltage into the PSA...