Hype or Hypersolar?

Keeping on eye to see if this is the real deal

LakeLeaf said:

Keeping on eye to see if this is the real deal

Click to expand...

Let us know when they ship.

EVDRIVER said:

LakeLeaf said:

Keeping on eye to see if this is the real deal

Click to expand...

Let us know when they ship.

Click to expand...

I think that's one vote for Hype :lol:

This concentrator approach reduces the number of cells required, but I believe thats not the expensive part anyways..

They give credit to the Sicilian Scientist Archimedes, so +1 for me.

LakeLeaf said:

Keeping on eye to see if this is the real deal

Click to expand...

Sure sounds like nonsense to me.

HyperSolar has invented the world’s first thin and flat solar concentrator for direct placement on top of existing solar cells.

Click to expand...

If it's directly on top of the solar cells, and it's thin and flat, then isn't the "concentrator's" surface area going to be the same as the solar panel's surface area? So it must be concentrating by a factor of ... 1:1 :!:

No, wait! I get it! It's straining all the impurities out of the sunlight and so concentrating its essence. :lol:

Ray

planet4ever said:

Sure sounds like nonsense to me.

HyperSolar has invented the world’s first thin and flat solar concentrator for direct placement on top of existing solar cells.

Click to expand...

If it's directly on top of the solar cells, and it's thin and flat, then isn't the "concentrator's" surface area going to be the same as the solar panel's surface area? So it must be concentrating by a factor of ... 1:1 :!:
No, wait! I get it! It's straining all the impurities out of the sunlight and so concentrating its essence. :lol:
Ray

Click to expand...

Wow! I'm surprised that you can't figure this out. 1:1? I guess you've never heard of magnification? Right now, my solar irradiance level is around 600 (have a gauge on the roof). With these, it would increase that irradiance level which would OBVIOUSLY increase the Kw and Kwh output. Sure sounds elementary and doable to me. :mrgreen:

This isn't pie in the sky . . . in fact several companies are already harnessing excess photo voltaic power using amplification methods and water cooling (to keep the cells not only from over heating, but harvesting the heat energy that's carried away). Here's a few links showing different methodologies:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Energy/2009/0428/in-israel-solar-power-that-wont-need-subsidies

http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_8531e892-a132-5170-be06-f505a6c47189.html

http://www.sundrumsolar.com/files/images/thermal1.png

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5askXxWTXE

I'd love to capture the wasted PV panel heat for home use AND get greater PV efficiency ... all it takes is extra money. Maybe by next year we'll be able to afford to add on the thermal collectors.

hill said:

This isn't pie in the sky . . . in fact several companies are already harnessing excess photo voltaic power using amplification methods and water cooling (to keep the cells not only from over heating, but harvesting the heat energy that's carried away).

Click to expand...

Amplification and water cooling are both feasible ways of improving solar systems, and I apologize for making a snap judgment without reading the entire article. I now see that they are planning to concentrate, but in a rather odd way, by keeping the surface area constant but reducing the number of cells receiving the energy. So they won't really be increasing the output of the solar panel, in fact they may be decreasing it somewhat, but they will be producing more energy per cell. From a homeowner's perspective, you won't be able to get any more energy off your roof, but you might be able to get the energy somewhat more cheaply, if they can keep their cost down, and also produce sparsely populated panels for a significantly reduced price.

Ray