New solar cell material achieves almost 100% efficiency, could solve world-wide energy problems

page: 6
98
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by die_another_day

New solar cell material achieves almost 100% efficiency, could solve world-wide energy problems


www.tgdaily.com

Columbus (OH) - Researchers at Ohio State University have accidentally discovered a new solar cell material capable of absorbing all of the sun's visible light energy. The material is comprised of a hybrid of plastics, molybdenum and titanium. The team discovered it not only fluoresces (as most solar cells do), but also phosphoresces. Electrons in a phosphorescent state remain at a place where they can be "siphoned off" as electricity over 7 million times longer than those generated in a fluorescent state. This combination of materials also utilizes the entire visible spectrum of light energy, translating into a theoretical potential of almost 100% efficiency. Commercial products are still years away, but this foundational work may well pave the way for a truly renewable form of clean, global energy.


A complete study of the team's work appears in the current issue of "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences" (PNAS).
(visit the link for the full news article)


I want to see just a small new solar cell on the cover of
Popular Science magazine.
Just 1 cell.
I don't need a huge solar panel.
Somebody build one!
What's the voltage output?







posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


We could have a big debate over whether the energy use for electron displacement is physics or chemistry. I think we just say Physics or Chemistry so blah
Both would be correct. Chemistry in a practical sense. Physics in the theoretical means (as well as practical depending on the field). LOL



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 06:21 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Promising, but they are years away from a product. The materials science might be impractical, or hard & expensive to manufacture. All remains to be seen of course.

9 years ago I worked for a progressive science research group actively looking at and evaluating technology, otherwise going with physicists to the inventor’s lab to see and test designs. They met and saw prototypes for a solar cell that had 60% efficiency. Unheard of then, but it looked very promising. It was also made from low cost materials. In fact a waste byproduct was the main material cost. I don’t have any details, but those I talked to said it was a viable product. I don’t know what happened to the project. I changed companies and was out of contact.

Suffice it to say that much need be scrutinized in such a claim. They announced “Matter Transmission” a few months ago. NEC also found faster than light speeds, and many other “discoveries” over the years. Theoretical is sometimes decades from practical application. Sometimes a fly in the ointment can be materials and methods expected or that don’t exist yet, like superconducting materials or otherwise components that are still up against some application challenges still.

I did some 3D simulations and patent drawings for an Over Unity or Zeropoint device they are testing theory on at the University of Colorado Nano Technology Lab. Just confirming theory is a many year job. DARPA also almost funded them. Not sure where that all is, but it’s clear now many are working toward alternative energy technology ideas. Expect much more news, but beware of the hype that sometimes is used to sell stock for a development firm dabbling in the energy tech market. New game, so watch for the old world exploitations to cloud the real news.

ZG



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:56 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Did anyone read any of the actual news bulletins released by the researchers themselves? They say they have reached 17% efficiency and could reach higher in the future. Nothing there about 100%.

researchnews.osu.edu...



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by kokuryu
Did anyone read any of the actual news bulletins released by the researchers themselves? They say they have reached 17% efficiency and could reach higher in the future. Nothing there about 100%.

researchnews.osu.edu...


Don't think the two articles are the same...


I guess one of the previous posters is right. The process itself isn't 100% efficient but the solar panels can absorb nearly 100% of the light.

The blacker it is the more sunlight it absorbs.

After some research I found out that there are already objects that absorb 99.9% of light. Some made out of carbon nanotubes.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
I have to call b.s. where it says "capable of absorbing all of the sun's visible light energy".

If that was a true fact, and the material was capable of absorbing all of the sun's visible light energy, that would mean it would look like a dark black void to the human eyes, which I doubt would be possible to do with plastic and titanium and molybdenum. I am sure it reflects a small percentage of visible light, and does not absorb 100% of the visible light.





That's probably why they said "almost 100%" instead of "100%". Just thought I would point that out. People see things that they want to see in order to jump on the 'BS' band wagon.

I would like to see this technology come to fruition. However, the only way it will happen is if either the government benefits financially or big oil does. Which essentially means that until big oil is gone this technology will not see the light of day (pardon the pun).



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   
I don't think the cost aspect will be the obstacle that will cause the most concern,I can't see any of the current crop of energy producers exactly welcoming this technology with open arms,we can but hope though eh!



posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   
This is the link to the Ohio State University research article

researchnews.osu.edu...



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by gormly

Originally posted by president
I think if Ty Pennington broke down and used some solar-panels of any sort on extreme home makeover, everyone would start using them.
Can you imagine a solar panel on every roof in America?


They HAVE used solar panels...
and Ty.. doesn't have that much influence anyway.



I don't really watch that show, but the couple of endings that I have seen, did NOT use solar panels. And I bet he has more influence than you think, If he used them on every show, all of the Home rebuild shows would use them. and it might actually catch on.
the reason power companies don't push more toward household solar is because it would power the lights for hydro gardens and the cops couldn't read electric bills..
grow your own.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I'll believe it when I see it



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by president
the reason power companies don't push more toward household solar is because it would power the lights for hydro gardens and the cops couldn't read electric bills..
grow your own.


Now that's a real conspiracy! Like the Power companies actually care about that, they just want to make a buck.



posted on Nov, 16 2008 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by eradown
 

I think this quote applies. It shows how much American creativity is siphoned off by the corporate cartels.


This is revolutionary. An incentive system designed to be scale-free and selffinancing, intended to encourage individual as well as corporate inventors, has reversed itself to favour the large-scale, becoming almost exclusively accessible to the largest (and most lethargic) corporations which can now skim off the cream of publicly funded research for their private benefit. In an earlier era, Americans would have dubbed this ‘taxation without representation’. It is also monopolisation with constipation. As we have already noted, the bigger the company the smaller the research product. Patents are used to define technological turf and trading territory—not to stimulate ideas. The giants that over-indulged in the feeding frenzy don’t need patent licences, they need intellectual laxatives. At least 90 per cent of all patents granted around the world go to companies, not individuals. In the case of life technologies the corporate share of intellectual property verges on 100 per cent. In fact, the leading 20 life industries have roughly 20 per cent of all biotechrelated patents issued in the United States since life patents became possible in 1980

Development Dialogue, Special Issue • The Journal of The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation 1996: www.dhf.uu.se/pdffiler/DD1996/DD1996_1-2_10.pdf


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.






posted on Nov, 16 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
"The material is comprised of a hybrid of plastics, molybdenum and titanium. "

So we need OIL, Titanium, and Molybdenum

OIL

TITANIUM

Molybdenum

"Oil- anywhere, mostly Arabs"

"Titanium is always bonded to other elements in nature. It is the ninth-most abundant element in the Earth's crust "

"The world's largest producers of molybdenum materials are the United States, Canada, Chile, Russia, and China."



posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkeybus
"The material is comprised of a hybrid of plastics, molybdenum and titanium. "

So we need OIL, Titanium, and Molybdenum

OIL

TITANIUM

Molybdenum

"Oil- anywhere, mostly Arabs"

"Titanium is always bonded to other elements in nature. It is the ninth-most abundant element in the Earth's crust "

"The world's largest producers of molybdenum materials are the United States, Canada, Chile, Russia, and China."




=p most of our oil actually comes from Canada.

And also, there are many more different elements that will deplete in this world. Such as phosphorus, which is going to deplete and go go below sea level if we don't conserve it.


But yeh... maybe we can mine more Titanium and Molybdenum if these cells do become more practical.



posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 


This is a little bit off topic, but dooper mentioned an asymmetrical magnet patent being confiscated. I searched around on google but I couldn't find any reference to that (except for drooper's post).

Does anyone have any further information on that?



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   






top topics



 
98
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join