Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

unverifiable_user t1_j1d8qb6 wrote

Power per kilogram is a very odd thing to measure. Efficiency/power per square meter is more important…. IMHO of course. This stuff could be way too fragile for most applications. That being said, solar is freaking awesome. I don’t understand how anybody could be ever against anything to do with solar energy. Well, I understand certain companies, but not humans being humans.

5

Turksarama t1_j1dgw20 wrote

I can't think of a single example of someone saying "solar sure is nice, if only it weren't so heavy!"

Possibly useful for space applications, but then you need to take the weight of the structure you apply it to into account.

3

StateChemist t1_j1dyv7k wrote

On the roof of a truck or other vehicle?

Minimal added weight, some efficiency added from solar gains.

Obviously won’t power the whole thing but can increase range slightly or top you off while you are parked at work.

I’m intrigued.

0

Turksarama t1_j1fpga4 wrote

Power per square metre is far more important. There's maybe two EVs which aren't even on the market yet with solar panels on them and one of them is absolutely optimised for efficiency (aptera). They're typically not worth it, you're better off just having panels on a roof facing the right direction and charging a battery.

1

StateChemist t1_j1hspzs wrote

Por que no los dos?

You say typically not worth it.

I hear typically not worth it, yet.

For things that move, lightweight is very important.

For houses I agree efficiency per area is more important.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t uses for this tech, just means it won’t revolutionarily replace rooftop panels.

But I’m in favor of all research in this sector, every innovation adds to the toolkit a renewable future might need.

1

Markharris1989 t1_j1dg3u6 wrote

Solar is ok, but PV technology is already up against some pretty firm physical constraints that stop any meaningful further ‘breakthroughs’ with the exception of niche areas like use in space.

Millions of dollar of research money is being pissed away finding ways that don’t make Solar any more efficient, cheaper or less dependent on resources that are hard to source and environmental hazardous then what we already have.

So I would say I’m against Solar but it isn’t gonna solve this thing by it’s self, or even likely be a major component of it. (Background: BSc, major in physics)

2

RedditorsArGrb t1_j1h18p7 wrote

there are thousands of experts working to engineer cheap tandem architectures in both public and private research environments. such breakthroughs are not at all precluded by any "firm constraints" physics undergrads learn in passing.

0