It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEW Solar Sheet Can Capture More Than 90-Percent Of Sunlight; Todays Tech only 20%

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
this wont take off because they can't make money off of it, it saves money.




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by nh_ee
 


I totally agree with you. Things need to change the Oil Barrens and Big Energy are going to be sending out the Assassins either that or pay this guy off big.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Its nice to see other people like yourself can see the Dis-info(paid) agents who come here and try to dispute the claim.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by WanderingThe3rd
 


Exactly The Energy companies will be paying the people who have Solar panels with 90% + efficiency A lot of money!

Even with the 20% efficient Solar panels i know people who get money back from the Energy company for having a surplus in Energy...




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by occy30

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by predator0187
 



Or he is waiting to File and create the patent so noone else can steal it. Understand?


No patents will be accepted for this. Anything over 20% gets caught and that is one way TPTB start the process of wiping the information from the source. Like I said before, this only goes to the masses if it's released to the public quickly.


I know TPTB is a snake and a demon we need to cut the head of the Snake.

TPTB are corrupt corporate scum.

We need to end their dominion



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by predator0187
 


They want to make money off of their work, and labor coming up with this. There is nothing wrong with that, but unfortunately the PTB will use that desire to gain control of their work and they may or may not be compensated.


Sure, sure, I get that. But would they not save a ton of money from saving for energy? would they also not become famous for making such a big discovery?

To me, if money and fame are what your after, figure it out and give it away for free. That will make you more rich and famous then patenting it. Everyone would have a field day, hell, you would probably be considered a Hero!

And really, to have a person that gave away a multi-million if not billion idea for free would garner more attention than selling it.

You would also have universities throwing money at you for more research opportunities.

So if you have it, even a tiny bit, release it for free, and watch the opportunities roll in.

Pred...



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
Just skimmed some of the guy's papers. You'll note he says it *captures* more than 90 percent of sunlight - that's from simulations he's run, not a device - but he never says it is more than 90% *efficient* as an energy conversion device. There's quite a difference. The capturing thing is how much of the e-field component of IR light it intercepts compared to a blackbody, and he's getting simulated maxima in the 92% range.

However, that's not the conversion efficiency. He's leaving out the diode loss and conduction losses.


You may have missed this little piece of Information.

Read the OP next time




Maybe its not 90%+ efficient but it sure is heck is up to 4x More energy than current Solar panels That capture only 20% of the available light.


Today's solar panels typically collect only 20% of the available light. Patrick Pinhero, associate professor in the MU Chemical Engineering Department, said he a way to extract electricity from the collected heat and sunlight using special high-speed electrical circuitry in collaboration with colleagues t the University of Colorado.


Am i allowed to say can you put this in your pipe and smoke it!

edit on 9-6-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Cryptonomicon
 


That is a good idea and i think its very plausible . We can probably create technology that can be self-sufficient on energy from the sun and rain water.

Exactly like nature is today.

Great concept I love it



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by predator0187
 


Yes but you forget the part where the Oil Barrens and Big Energy. Threaten to kill them if they come out in public and release this Technology.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TheUniverse
 


Just do it. What better way to die than to be a saviour of humanity? They do not need to know anything your working on. Then release it to every website you could, news and science alone would make it go viral. Get it out to other scientists and let them run with it as well.

Once it is on the net there is no controlling it, it will spread like wildfire.

I'm tired of hearing that others have the answer to the worlds problems and keep them secrets.

Pred...



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I think those are the 2 papers, both peer reviewed.

1st SOLAR NANTENNA ELECTROMAGNETIC COLLECTORS

INL News Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Flexible nanoantenna arrays capture abundant solar energy


inlportal.inl.gov...

www.inl.gov/pdfs/nantenna.pdf

lastly the 2nd with more information but in a closed access journal, hosted freely here -

jjjtir.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/sle011014.pdf

J. Sol. Energy Eng. / Volume 132 / Issue 1 / Research Papers
Theory and Manufacturing Processes of Solar Nanoantenna Electromagnetic Collectors
J. Sol. Energy Eng. -- February 2010 -- Volume 132, Issue 1, 011014 (9 pages)
doi:10.1115/1.4000577


Funded by DOE,


This work was supported by the U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, under DOE
Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheUniverse
Read the OP next time


I did. Read the actual paper next time instead of Tom's Hardware.







Am i allowed to say can you put this in your pipe and smoke it!



You may, but only if you note the switch in the base that the percentages are given in.

For solar panels, the 20% is in conversion efficiency. For this lab simulation nantenna, the ">90%" is in collection efficiency. Two different numbers totally. When the diode and conduction losses are factored in, you might NOT have more than 20% conversion efficiency - the conversion efficiency adds in all losses vs all collection. And so far, it doesn't look like he's actually fabbed diodes on - just the antenna part.

Why hasn't he you might ask. Well, if you actually understood what is going on here, you might have your eyebrow a bit higher than I believe it is by your comments. He's going to have to fab a diode that is efficient at rectifying LIGHT. The effective frequency is in the THz - which is why he's saying he's going to do it at near IR instead of sunlight, which would be even worse.

A THz diode that's worth a damn is tough to come by. And this guy is going to have to punch them out by the gazillions using some sort of amorphous tech if he's doing it on flexible sheets. He's also going to have to do it with some sort of fab-failure safe architecture so the equivalent of "bad pixels" don't short the entire sheet or burn holes in it. That's if he can figure out how to do it at all - THz diodes are notoriously badly leaky even when you make them out of fairy dust, and as a power diode would be hideously inefficient. Which is why he's skipping the diode bits and just fabbing the little antennae at this point.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Pinhero believes that such 90-95% efficient solar panels could be built and offered to be manufactured into products such as roof shingles or automobiles


No where does it say he has ever built one.

Its only a theoretical concept.

I will believe it when i see a working model till then its BS by a scientist looking for money.
edit on 9-6-2011 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
I will believe it when i see a working model till then its BS by a scientist looking for money


He should just the talk to these people;


Shell explores alternative energy

Environmentalists have welcomed plans by the Shell oil company to invest vast sums in wind and solar energy over the next five years.

It will put up to US$1bn into research and development - although that will still be far less than it spends on its oil and gas business.


That was ten years ago.

They continue to invest in sustainable energy, including working with and lobbying governments, investing in and direct development of alternative energy products and services.

They publish their alternative and emerging energy market strategies online.

They are not alone.


Chevron Tests Solar Technology

At Chevron, we're applying our energy expertise to analyzing solar technology at a test facility in California. We are evaluating the best solar panels currently available. The research will help us understand how to build arrays 25 times to 100 times this size.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheUniverse
TPTB are corrupt corporate scum.


Don't forget governments, they are in on it too!



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by predator0187
 


They want to make money off of their work, and labor coming up with this. There is nothing wrong with that, but unfortunately the PTB will use that desire to gain control of their work and they may or may not be compensated.


Sadly, "TPTB" are funding him. This work is being done by Idaho National Labs, a big DOE facility in the same happy family as Los Alamos and Sandia. Oh, and Sea Systems Command, or NAVSEA as they're known now.


Los Alamos and Sandia are operated by a different consortium than Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The Prime also co-operates the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Colorado, Pacific Northwest NL (PNNL), Lawrence Livermore NL, Brookhaven NL, and Oak Ridge NL, so energy R&D management you could say is being managed by a team put together from a very different consortium of companies. DOE NLs are operated by a consortium of private technology development companies and national and local Universities for the DOE through proposal submission awarded contracts for an indicated minimum contract life before they go up for rebids.
edit on 9-6-2011 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
Los Alamos and Sandia are operated by a different consortium than Idaho National Laboratory (INL).


As Billy Joel might have said, "It's all DOE to me".

It's not like the university is funding it in the back lab from alumni donations. If you're the sort to worry about "TPTB", it's still funded by them.

What THEY'RE after is a decent THz diode, at least partially. They also see it as a possible source for a novel new IR detection system.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Wrong again. Yes Solar Panels are less efficient the Hotter they are thats why Maybe someone can patent a water system underneath the Solar Panels Generating even more power via Steam.

BUT YOUR MISSING AND CLEARLY AVOIDING WHAT I SAID


Maybe its not 90%+ efficient but it sure is heck is up to 4x LIGHT than current Solar panels That capture only 20% of the available light.

Solar Panels- Wiki



Sunlight conversion rates (solar panel efficiencies) can vary from 5-18% in commercial products, typically lower than the efficiencies of their cells in isolation. Panels with conversion rates around 18% are in development incorporating innovations such as power generation on the front and back sides.[citation needed] The Energy Density of a solar panel is the efficiency described in terms of peak power output per unit of surface area, commonly expressed in units of Watts per square foot (W/ft2). The most efficient mass-produced solar panels have energy density values of greater than 13 W/ft2.


Tomshardware.com New Solar Panels Efficient 90-95%


Today's solar panels typically collect only 20% of the available light. Patrick Pinhero, associate professor in the MU Chemical Engineering Department, said he a way to extract electricity from the collected heat and sunlight using special high-speed electrical circuitry in collaboration with colleagues t the University of Colorado.

Pinhero believes that such 90-95% efficient solar panels could be built and offered to be manufactured into products such as roof shingles or automobiles. The scientist is now looking for funding to develop and mature the technology.







Pinhero said. "If successful, this product will put us orders of magnitudes ahead of the current solar energy technologies we have available to us today." According to Pinhero, today's photovoltaic methods of sunlight collection are generally inefficient and neglect much of the available solar electromagnetic spectrum.

edit on 9-6-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheUniverse
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Wrong again. Yes Solar Panels are less efficient the Hotter they are thats why Maybe someone can patent a water system underneath the Solar Panels Generating even more power via Steam.

BUT YOUR MISSING AND CLEARLY AVOIDING WHAT I SAID

Maybe its not 90%+ efficient but it sure is heck is up to 4x LIGHT than current Solar panels That capture only 20% of the available light.


No, They CONVERT 20% of the available light to electrical energy. That takes into account the diode bandgap and conduction losses. You don't know what they COLLECT because they aren't rated that way.

What this guy is citing is COLLECTION efficiency not CONVERSION efficiency. You don't have a clue if he can fabricate a usable diode at all, much less with amorphous silicon or whatever he's proposing, and there's no telling what sort of leakage or gap loss you'll have with it because he hasn't done it yet. Once he has, you'll know what the CONVERSION efficiency is, but until you do, you don't know at all. They are not the same thing. The article you're reading, and to some extent the author, is conflating the two. You can't do that.

I can lay a piece of black construction paper in the sun. It'll have a collection efficiency that's decent. It won't have a conversion efficiency at all, because it doesn't convert light to electrical energy. So far, neither does this nantenna.

edit to add: you need to read something more scientifically literate/accurate than "Tom's Hardware", they're not even up to "Popular Science" much less something you can argue over. The guy's work is here and there on the net without any fee.
edit on 9-6-2011 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)


Second edit: the "special high frequency" bits they're talking about are the diodes he doesn't have any of
edit on 9-6-2011 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 





Today's solar panels typically collect only 20% of the available light. Patrick Pinhero, associate professor in the MU Chemical Engineering Department, said he a way to extract electricity from the collected heat and sunlight using special high-speed electrical circuitry in collaboration with colleagues t the University of Colorado.

Pinhero believes that such 90-95% efficient solar panels could be built and offered to be manufactured into products such as roof shingles or automobiles. The scientist is now looking for funding to develop and mature the technology.

Pinhero said. "If successful, this product will put us orders of magnitudes ahead of the current solar energy technologies we have available to us today." According to Pinhero, today's photovoltaic methods of sunlight collection are generally inefficient and neglect much of the available solar electromagnetic spectrum.



Also they may be able to utilise even the Infra-red Light at night See here My friend and read it

en.wikipedia.org...


The use of infrared photovoltaic cells has also been proposed to increase efficiencies, and perhaps produce power at night.[citation needed]

edit on 9-6-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Yeah thats the thing You claim to know so much about Solar panels yet you won't provide a possible conversion rate from 90%+ collection of the light compared to 20% collection in conventional solar panels



What this guy is citing is COLLECTION efficiency not CONVERSION efficiency. You don't have a clue if he can fabricate a usable diode at all,


What would you estimate the amount of power increase from the conversion efficiency considering they are taking in 90%+ light compared to a meager 20% light with conventional panels.

I'm starting to think you're a paid Big Energy dis-info
edit on 9-6-2011 by TheUniverse because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join