• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why aren't magnifying glasses used in conjunction with solar panels?

her209

her209

No Lifer
Now, granted the solar panel would need to follow the sun as it moves across the sky, it would concentrate a large area of the sun light onto a small array of solar panels. Am I missing something?
 
robably because the cost/benefit ratio is minimal.

edit: And they just increase the W/m^2. But the net w/m^2 is still the same.
 
They do something similar using mirrors where they focus the reflection on certain points. It might not actually be with solar panels, I think it was with a natural steam generator.
 
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
They do something similar using mirrors where they focus the reflection on certain points. It might not actually be with solar panels, I think it was with a natural steam generator.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's with solar panels. There's a show called Invention Nation on the Science Channel where they were showing a solar reflector/collector setup. It was computer controlled to track the position of the sun to get maximum exposure. Worked quite well.
 
they do something like that already, this is how the solar panels see multiple 'suns'.

Unrelated, but this is a cool pic: Text
 
What exactly would be the point?

It's probably more beneficial and cheaper to just use the surface area for more panels, rather than smaller panels and a bigger lens.....
 
Originally posted by: Eli
What exactly would be the point?

It's probably more beneficial and cheaper to just use the surface area for more panels, rather than smaller panels and a bigger lens.....
Click to expand...

The current materials in solar panels are rare and very expensive. This is why they are not implemented all over the place, and have low efficiency. Recent research into integrating cadmium quantum dots looks pretty promising though.
 
Originally posted by: ironwing
Look up solar concentrators. Frensnel lenses are being used.

Here's one:
http://www.ida.net/users/tetonsl/solar/solarhom.htm

IIRC, the cell is different than the ones on normal systems, able to make use of the intense light.

Another one:
http://www.treehugger.com/file...08/rising_star_eff.php
Click to expand...

What?

Solar concentrators are used to heat water..

However, you could use one to run a steam turbine generator....

Edit: That second one you linked to is pretty cool, using the heat to run a sterling engine/generator setup... I've seen that page before somewhere.
 
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: ironwing
Look up solar concentrators. Frensnel lenses are being used.

Here's one:
http://www.ida.net/users/tetonsl/solar/solarhom.htm

IIRC, the cell is different than the ones on normal systems, able to make use of the intense light.

Another one:
http://www.treehugger.com/file...08/rising_star_eff.php
Click to expand...

What?

Solar concentrators are used to heat water..

However, you could use one to run a steam turbine generator....

Edit: That second one you linked to is pretty cool, using the heat to run a sterling engine/generator setup... I've seen that page before somewhere.
Click to expand...


Further down was what I was aiming at. Sorry about the first link, my bad.
http://www.solfocus.com/product.php?pid=4
 
There are probably diminishing returns. A doubling of light intensity isn't going to double output, I don't think.

Then you have to worry about heat.. panels already get hot enough.
 
Originally posted by: Eli
What exactly would be the point?

It's probably more beneficial and cheaper to just use the surface area for more panels, rather than smaller panels and a bigger lens.....
Click to expand...

Much cheaper to produce reflector arrays or lenses, than ultra-efficient solar cells.
 
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: ironwing
Look up solar concentrators. Frensnel lenses are being used.

Here's one:
http://www.ida.net/users/tetonsl/solar/solarhom.htm

IIRC, the cell is different than the ones on normal systems, able to make use of the intense light.

Another one:
http://www.treehugger.com/file...08/rising_star_eff.php
Click to expand...

What?

Solar concentrators are used to heat water..

However, you could use one to run a steam turbine generator....

Edit: That second one you linked to is pretty cool, using the heat to run a sterling engine/generator setup... I've seen that page before somewhere.
Click to expand...


Further down was what I was aiming at. Sorry about the first link, my bad.
http://www.solfocus.com/product.php?pid=4
Click to expand...
Hmm.. Very interesting. That's pretty cool.

 
They are used.

However, there are additional complexities - the lenses/reflectors are expensive and more difficult to maintain than flat panels. Additionally, they need precise alignment, and PVs exposed to concentrated light need some form of cooling - usually water cooling - to prevent damage.

This approach is used with very high efficiency PV cells - which are exceedingly expensive. However, these super efficiency cells can be operated at 500 suns intensity, so a 1 sq inch cell is almost as powerful as a sq yard flat panel, but is much cheaper - allowing the money to be spent on the optics - and because these multi-layer cells are 3x as efficient as conventional cells, the total collection area can be 1/3 the size.

There is one big disadvantage though: flat panels, by virtue of their area pick up a lot of scatter and diffuse light - e.g. blue light scattered in the sky, or light diffused by clouds - this may be as much as 30% of total output. Diffuse light cannot be focused, and concentrator cells get no significant output from scatter. So while, flat panels may offer 20-30% output even in overcast conditions, a concentrator will offer no useful output.
 
I'm still waiting for us to invent organic cells. Think spirulina could survive in a nutrient gel constantly flowing current produced by their own reaction to sunlight? (spirulina + viral injection of electric eel genes)
 
Originally posted by: Kaervak
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
They do something similar using mirrors where they focus the reflection on certain points. It might not actually be with solar panels, I think it was with a natural steam generator.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's with solar panels. There's a show called Invention Nation on the Science Channel where they were showing a solar reflector/collector setup. It was computer controlled to track the position of the sun to get maximum exposure. Worked quite well.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would allow them to get optimal sun exposure to overcome the changing position of the sun.

I do remember the other thing with the steam. They had a tower that was filled with water, and then they had it surrounded by mirrors which heated it up and turned the water to steam which turned some generators or something as it rose. The temperature they get was pretty astounding.
 
Originally posted by: Mark R
They are used.

However, there are additional complexities - the lenses/reflectors are expensive and more difficult to maintain than flat panels. Additionally, they need precise alignment, and PVs exposed to concentrated light need some form of cooling - usually water cooling - to prevent damage.

This approach is used with very high efficiency PV cells - which are exceedingly expensive. However, these super efficiency cells can be operated at 500 suns intensity, so a 1 sq inch cell is almost as powerful as a sq yard flat panel, but is much cheaper - allowing the money to be spent on the optics.

There is one big disadvantage though: flat panels, by virtue of their area pick up a lot of scatter and diffuse light - e.g. blue light scattered in the sky, or light diffused by clouds - this may be as much as 30% of total output. Diffuse light cannot be focused, and concentrator cells get no significant output from scatter. So while, flat panels may offer 20-30% output even in overcast conditions, a concentrator will offer no useful output.
Click to expand...
Very interesting.

:thumbsup:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top