An interesting idea, but it's total wishcraft at this point. One significant thing the article misses is that if (<i>big</i> if!) they can make this work, it could significantly increase the power output of the solar cells, since PV cell voltage is inversely a function of junction temperature. (Current is a function of insolation. This is why PV panels make much more power on a cold, clear winter day than they do in the middle of a Texas summer - the extra voltage more than makes up for the smaller winter current. And why although they've never caught on for cost reasons, hybrid PV/thermal panels can make sense on two fronts.)
Afaik the radiative cooling element should not point to the sun for good performance. On the other hand you want to have your solar cell pointing <i>to</i> the sun. So at least one of them doesn't perform well.<p>Eg. on a building with tilted roof (prevalent in Middle Europe ) one would like to mount the former on the north side and the latter on the south side for good performance. Unfortunately the article does make no mention of it.
"...That Can Make Solar Power and Cool Buildings" but "What they weren’t able to test is whether the device also produced electricity. The upper layer in this experiment lacked the metal foil, normally found in solar cells, that would have blocked the infrared light from escaping."<p>They've invented an over-elaborate heat shield until they can demonstrate what the title promises.
What I'm more interested in is passive cooling for solar panels. We lose so much efficiency from higher temps. Placing them on our hot roofs, even with an air gap, is just ridiculous.
(video)
<a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/aaswath_raman_how_we_can_turn_the_cold_of_outer_space_into_a_renewable_resource/transcript?language=en" rel="nofollow">https://www.ted.com/talks/aaswath_raman_how_we_can_turn_the_...</a><p>> "What if we could use the cold darkness of outer space to cool buildings on earth? In this mind-blowing talk, physicist Aaswath Raman details the technology he's developing to harness "night-sky cooling" -- a natural phenomenon where infrared light escapes earth and heads to space, carrying heat along with it -- which could dramatically reduce the energy used by our cooling systems (and the pollution they cause). Learn more about how this approach could lead us towards a future where we intelligently tap into the energy of the universe."
This makes no sense to me. The article states that there is one frequency of radiation that will pass through the atmosphere, so the device radiates at that wavelength. But why would it make any difference? The atmosphere might reflect most radiation back to earth, but not back to the point it came from. So it shouldn't matter what frequency the device is radiating - its radiation will be reflected elsewhere, and radiation from elsewhere will be reflected to it.
Emitters in the infrared window have been in the news before[0], but has there been any realworld deployments?<p>[0] <a href="https://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/november/radiative-cooling-mirror-112614.html" rel="nofollow">https://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/november/radiative-cooli...</a>
A similar cooling effect, though less powerful, has been achieved in specially treated wood:<p><a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/05/engineered-wood-radiates-heat-space-potentially-slashing-cooling-costs" rel="nofollow">https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/05/engineered-wood-radi...</a>