TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The Solar Sunflower

79 点作者 Rifu超过 9 年前

10 条评论

jacquesm超过 9 年前
I take exception to the use of the word &#x27;invention&#x27; here because that most likely implies that patents are at stake. Tech such as this has been tried on-and-off by various parties since the 80&#x27;s, with many variations on geometry, working fluid, actuation and tracking.<p>Parabolic segments are a pretty expensive way to do this because it requires moving the collector around. Much simpler and easier to have a stationary reflector harness and actuate the individual mirrors instead, then you can keep the collector on the ground where it is much easier to tie it into something that makes use of the collected energy.
评论 #10144224 未加载
评论 #10144452 未加载
评论 #10143931 未加载
评论 #10144333 未加载
评论 #10143639 未加载
评论 #10143621 未加载
x0054超过 9 年前
I wonder why they are bothering with gallium-arsenide panels when using a solar thermal setup would be a lot more cost efficient and probably more energy efficient as well. You simply run some kind of coolant through the collector, exchange the heat into water, and run a steam turbine from the resulting steam. You can even collect the water afterwords and condense it to get distilled water. There are many power plants that run on that principle, but it would be cool to see something that can be mounted in the back yard. And the materials necessary are very common and cheep, so the entire product could be much cheeper as well.
评论 #10144610 未加载
powertower超过 9 年前
&gt; GaAs is much more efficient at converting sunlight into electricity (38 percent in this case, versus about 20 percent for silicon).<p>Is that true... You get almost 2 times the power output with GaAs cells then conventional solar cells made from silicone?
评论 #10144335 未加载
artartart超过 9 年前
The sub-title claims 80% efficiency. Where did they get that from? 80% is close to the theoretical maximum, so I think the figure is misleading and can discredit Arstechnica and more importantly an otherwise admirable endeavor.
评论 #10145842 未加载
danmaz74超过 9 年前
While reading the article, I was wondering why combined PV&#x2F;water heating conventional panels aren&#x27;t taking off on rooftop installations. Looks like something that would make a lot of sense.
评论 #10144189 未加载
评论 #10143959 未加载
评论 #10145169 未加载
bitsoda超过 9 年前
Ack, those circles waste so much space. They should put a in an array of hexagonal reflectors instead.
评论 #10145885 未加载
评论 #10145304 未加载
gwern超过 9 年前
Another step towards _Ringworld_!
ogig超过 9 年前
The gigantic PS power plants in Seville are the same thing, using a water tower instead photovoltaics.<p>They are quite spectacular: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;PS10_solar_power_plant" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;PS10_solar_power_plant</a>
评论 #10144710 未加载
dredmorbius超过 9 年前
A bit of background from some earlier articles I&#x27;ve seen added to this;<p>The concept is based on IBM technology aimed mostly at thermal management in coimputer servers, but with applications to solar power. See e.g.,: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;redd.it&#x2F;2afct9" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;redd.it&#x2F;2afct9</a><p>Traditional PV has the problem that elecrical generation is degraded at higher temperatures. This is especially the case where sunlight is concentrated on the collector. That&#x27;s why most PV are flat panels rather than arrays of (cheap) mirrors + panels. Another factor is that flat panels don&#x27;t need to track the sun (you point them generally south and angled by your latitude), hugely simplifying installations.<p>The &quot;5,000 suns&quot; bit here basically means that a total <i>reflective</i> surface of 5,000x the <i>PV</i> area is used. This also means that <i>heat</i> is approximately 5,000x greater. An advantage is that you need far less of the expensive PV collector. A problem such designs is encountering is that PV really isn&#x27;t that expensive anymore. Oh well.... Of problems to have, this is a relatively good one.<p>Getting <i>both</i> electricity <i>and</i> heat from the same installation, <i>if you&#x27;ve got something to do with both</i>, can be useful. Though it often isn&#x27;t. As the images accompanying the article show, the &quot;sunflower&quot; design ... isn&#x27;t exactly unobtrusive. Where panels can be designed directly into new or existing construction, studding your walls and roof with heleostat parabolic dishes is ... more challenging.<p>There are also integrated solar PV + thermal systems. As others have noted they increase complexity and installation costs, though if you can stomach those the benefits in terms of overall fuel and mains savings are substantial.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Photovoltaic_thermal_hybrid_solar_collector" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Photovoltaic_thermal_hybrid_so...</a><p>A few further points:<p>● The real key in solar isn&#x27;t <i>efficiency</i> but <i>cost</i>. Single-layer solar is limited to about 37% efficiency because physics, the peak theoretical efficiency is about 85%, at high cost, again, because of physics. You&#x27;re starting from a ~1kW&#x2F;m² flux, with reductions from there for panel efficiency, spacing factors, capacity factor, inverter (direct DC use would be a 10% gain), and net storage costs. The 85% efficiency gains of the Sunflower would all but certainly be eaten up through installation, maintenance, and manufacture costs.<p>● Solar and thermal <i>can</i> be combined, and with sufficient thermal mass, gains are fairly substantial.<p>● Total collector area matters. A small number of high-effieciency collectors ... collects a small amount of energy. A large, cheap area of modestly lower-efficiency collectors beats the efficiency gains. It&#x27;s usually possible to increase collector area 2-10x. It&#x27;s <i>not</i> possible to increase collector efficiency 10x starting at a 20% baseline.<p>For some <i>massively</i> impressive examples of what can be done with net-zero construction <i>in Fairbanks, Alaska</i>, see Thorsten Chlupp&#x27;s Reina LLP:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reina-llc.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reina-llc.com&#x2F;</a><p>I particularly recommend the video series. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reina-llc.com&#x2F;resources&#x2F;videos1&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reina-llc.com&#x2F;resources&#x2F;videos1&#x2F;</a><p>The following two videos are <i>long</i> (2+ hours) but <i>incredibly</i> detailed. Particularly impressive are Chlupp&#x27;s use of thermal mass (both static insulation and a central thermal-stratification 5,000 gallon tank), and the consequent challenges (air exchange, heat exchange on <i>all</i> interfaces, including freshwater and sewerage), and most critically: moisture control -- condensation across a 100+ degree thermal gradient is a massive challenge.<p>If you&#x27;re looking for <i>solid</i> construction details, these are an excellent resource.<p>Path to Net Zero Energy Series -- Alaska&#x27;s first Net Zero Homes <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=AtHkvpRI6fc" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=AtHkvpRI6fc</a><p>Alaska&#x27;s First Net Zero Energy Homes Performance Update <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=Xen_VWyDezY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=Xen_VWyDezY</a><p>2nd video is an update on the home described in the first. Goal achieved, except for plug-in Prius accounting.
srtjstjsj超过 9 年前
Is the &quot;5,000 suns&quot; part complete marketing BS? The description says that they compress the energy of one sun into 1&#x2F;5000 the area, to reduce the expense of photovoltaic material. But the process isn&#x27;t 5000x more efficient at obtaining energy from the sun.<p>At best, it&#x27;s &quot;the power of 5000 solar panels&quot;, which is a much less exciting headline.
评论 #10144155 未加载