photovoltaics at 40%

Albers

25th February 2007 - 07:46 PM

Here's what we should have done long ago: http://www.energy.gov/news/4503.htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Failing this, there's the old Greek mirror trick: http://americanhistory.si.edu/powering/images/gallry53.htm

adoucette

25th February 2007 - 08:20 PM

QUOTE (Albers+Feb 25 2007, 02:46 PM)

Here's what we should have done long ago:

???

We started this LONG AGO.

QUOTE

In the early 1980s, DOE began researching what are known as “multi-junction gallium arsenide-based solar cell devices,” multi-layered solar cells which converted about 16 percent of the sun’s available energy into electricity. In 1994, DOE’s National Renewable Energy laboratory broke the 30 percent barrier, which attracted interest from the space industry. Most satellites today use these multi-junction cells.

Reaching 40 percent efficiency helps further President Bush’s Solar America Initiative (SAI) goals, which aims to win nationwide acceptance of clean solar energy technologies by 2015.

There is one issue which efficiency alone doesn't address, and that is COST, which is why these multi-juntion cells are still predominately used in Space.

So while its good news, its only one facet of the multifaceted cost problem that still prevents solar from being cost competitive with other means.

Arthur

Albers

25th February 2007 - 08:27 PM

I have been here. To read where I come from, Google on "Tilting At Tobacco", on Dr. Stanton Glantz. I speak in the middle of the paper. (Stanford Alum Mag)

adoucette

25th February 2007 - 09:43 PM

Nice, but WHAT does that bit have to do with the thread TOPIC?

Arthur

Albers

25th February 2007 - 10:30 PM

There was $ten million a year in defense money at Stanford, in things like microwave crystals, infrared lasers, helicopter technology; virtually none aimed toward visible light photovoltaics. The Chairman of the Applied Physics Dept. argued with me that all these things had multiple applicability, but we argued that the whole program was skewed and that the DOD was not Santa Claus. I am one of the large group of people who put men on the moon. At Grumman Aircraft shop I assembled electrical cables with sixty conductors, for the Lunar Lander, and watched it being assembled in the White Room. We decided, with a large social will, to do this.

adoucette

25th February 2007 - 11:09 PM

Why would DOD be particularly interested in investing in Visible Light Photovoltaics?

Back then WHY WOULD ANYONE?

In the 60s all the way to the early 70s the Nuke crowd was talking about generating electricity that was "Too Cheap to Meter" so WHY would anyone be particularly interested (besides someone like NASA) in photovoltaics?

And over 30 years ago the FUSION crowd was saying we were 50 years away from LIMITLESS ENERGY. Of course we seem to stay the same 50 years away.

There are BILLIONS of dollars that have been and are being invested in energy research. Energy reseach is being carried out on a GLOBAL basis by every major country in the world. What makes you think even MORE money would help?

What would it take AWAY from?

Arthur

Albers

25th February 2007 - 11:14 PM

Touche my friend, you are lively, but not particularly on the point. The role of government in policy leadership is an important debate to be respected. So are the other large forces in political economics.

PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.

To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.