• BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Why not just put the solar panel next to the window so you don’t have to cover it at all? The more light a panel absorbes, the more efficient it is, which is kind of the exact opposite type of thing that you would want to cover a window with if you still want it to be a window. I’m not even going to bother addressing the inefficiencies of harvesting indoor light, other than to say it’s idiotic.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      This seems more like an alternative to tinting films. So you can harvest the energy that would otherwise be lost.

    • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I mean, couldn’t you take a solar panel and make it like an awning above the window or something? Have a system where it can pull into the window to be flush with the building if you want.

    • reptar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The indoor light sounds pretty silly, I agree.

      Do you think there is an appreciable amount of IR, near IR, UV light that it could be worth it? I’m out of date, are we good at harvesting near-ir in photovoltaics? I remember hearing or reading about some frequency upconversion material solutions but it’s been a while.

      Another problem that comes to mind is the fact that you often want to reflect non-useful-to-vision light rather than absorb it (and heat up).