Since usually sun is up, panels on roof more efficient, solar panel window or panel on shutter is like panel on wall but worse because window and shutter can open and close. When panel on wall will make sense then maybe window and shutter will appear.
I have the ability of more eloquence, but why many word when few word do trick?
Is that a purely cost effectiveness thing or is concentration of photons necessary for conversion? I guess I’m asking if these work through multiphoton absorption or just single photon? If it’s the first, is a lens array an option. Ignoring cost, that is (although it is impressive what can be done on the cheap)?
I’m sure these questions are solar 101 from 1935, but maybe you know!
It’s always a cost effectiveness thing when it comes to photovoltaic panels.
Regarding the second question I’m not certain, the panel should be always producing some energy from the light it gets hit from, but the voltage needs to be beyond a certain threshold to be used. And since the voltage depends on the light intensity the positioning of the panel affects a lot the total power that can be actually used in a day. Lenses(?) and mirrors can improve the production but they have to be pointed to the panel, and since the sun moves they have to move too, and the mechanisms to make them move make the whole thing more complicated and probably expensive than simply buying a second panel. That said solar towers exist (look them up they look cool) but they don’t rely on photovoltaics but instead use the heat to boil water and pass the steam through a turbine to produce electricity.
Thanks homie - I think you’re right about cost effectiveness. I guess I also have in mind nothing is cost effective until it is. I’ve been reading a lot of sci fi.
My prior career was very optically based so some general concepts are field adjacent for me. So my interest is informed in a “knows just enough to be dangerous” kind of way
Since usually sun is up, panels on roof more efficient, solar panel window or panel on shutter is like panel on wall but worse because window and shutter can open and close. When panel on wall will make sense then maybe window and shutter will appear. I have the ability of more eloquence, but why many word when few word do trick?
Is that a purely cost effectiveness thing or is concentration of photons necessary for conversion? I guess I’m asking if these work through multiphoton absorption or just single photon? If it’s the first, is a lens array an option. Ignoring cost, that is (although it is impressive what can be done on the cheap)?
I’m sure these questions are solar 101 from 1935, but maybe you know!
It’s always a cost effectiveness thing when it comes to photovoltaic panels. Regarding the second question I’m not certain, the panel should be always producing some energy from the light it gets hit from, but the voltage needs to be beyond a certain threshold to be used. And since the voltage depends on the light intensity the positioning of the panel affects a lot the total power that can be actually used in a day. Lenses(?) and mirrors can improve the production but they have to be pointed to the panel, and since the sun moves they have to move too, and the mechanisms to make them move make the whole thing more complicated and probably expensive than simply buying a second panel. That said solar towers exist (look them up they look cool) but they don’t rely on photovoltaics but instead use the heat to boil water and pass the steam through a turbine to produce electricity.
Thanks homie - I think you’re right about cost effectiveness. I guess I also have in mind nothing is cost effective until it is. I’ve been reading a lot of sci fi.
My prior career was very optically based so some general concepts are field adjacent for me. So my interest is informed in a “knows just enough to be dangerous” kind of way