Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#71

Post by namuol »

rootusrootus wrote: post #64
Scubabear68 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The oil and gas lobby in the US is staggeringly powerful. Many US regulatory bodies (like FERC) have been captured by industry for years. It has been very difficult to do anything that might negatively impact the oil and gas industry. So not so much anti-solar as anti-anything-threatening-fossil-fuels. See also: “clean coal”.

I remember seeing oil wells all over the area when I lived for a while in Oklahoma. Heck, there was even one in the middle of a mall parking lot. Very oil friendly area. But still, Oklahoma is the third in the nation for wind energy production. Texas is number 1. I think the oil and gas lobby must not be quite as powerful as you think.

Considering the possibility that fossil fuels can be exported to resource/land-poor states for a higher premium may explain the “Number 1” status that Texas has here. The more fuel you can free up for export, the richer the state becomes.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#72

Post by Armisael16 »

davedx wrote: post #69
jldugger wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bear in mind that China has like, no oil[0] or gas[1] at all. Their investments into renewables is kind of a life of death situation, not just for the world, but the PLA specifically, who would likely monopolize domestic oil production in any military engagement. Also worth mentioning that Beijing sits on one side of a mountain range, and the other side is arid desert. It's kind of a no brainer to drop solar panels t…

"solar doesn't make sense in many places in the US. You want somewhere dry and bright, which cuts off the pacific northwest, and most of the north*" Can you explain with numbers how you arrive at this conclusion? (Solar is extremely popular and viable in Northern Europe, so it surprises me to read it)

Most of the US is in fact better for solar than most of Europe (Iberia is fairly good).

However, energy prices in the US are considerably lower, so the bar for profitability is much higher.

The EU also has colossal subsidies for renewables, which obviously skew the market. In a purely market-driven world Europe would not be investing in solar.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#73

Post by jws »

mrguyorama wrote: post #49
rconti wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is USA government policy actively antagonistic towards this specific technology? Or just doesn't have specific support/incentives for this specific kind of technology? Is there any reason the market doesn't/can't support buying these panels here? Or are there weird tariffs against it? IS there not already a boom in solar PV installation in the USA? It looks like we're far from a watts-per-capita leader (15th in the w…

The Republican party in the united states is so anti-green energy, they removed solar panels from the white house in the 80s, shortly after they were installed, just because they didn't like them. They also blamed wind turbines for the extreme grid failure in Texas last year, and it is a current talking point that "wind and solar can't ever work" and that wind turbines kill so many birds that we can't possibly ever u…

Just because it gets distorted, not that it changes the message.

The solar panels installed on the White House during the Carter years were a solar hot water heater, not a photovoltaic system.

Here is part of his speech from the dedication ceremony in 1979: "In the year 2000 this solar water heater behind me, which is being dedicated today, will still be here supplying cheap, efficient energy…. A generation from now, this solar heater can either be a curiosity, a museum piece, an example of a road not taken or it can be just a small part of one of the greatest and most exciting adventures ever undertaken by the American people."

Details are not readily available without clearance, but the roof of the White House is a limited commodity and there was probably an antimissile system installed there after the solar panels. They might have needed the space.

Here in 2022 we can see which road was chosen. We didn't get to 20% renewables by 2000, but we are up to 12%, so making progress, if somewhat more slowly.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#74

Post by nashashmi »

ck2 wrote: post #23

Imagine in a decade or two a paint that as long as it's continuous, it becomes an electron pump in the sun. One electrode per side of the house or whatever structure, even roads, signs, etc. Even if it was only a few percent efficiency, the massive surface areas would be more than enough regardless of sun angle or intensity.

recycling would be a problem.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#75

Post by matmatmatmat »

Armisael16 wrote: post #72
davedx wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"solar doesn't make sense in many places in the US. You want somewhere dry and bright, which cuts off the pacific northwest, and most of the north*" Can you explain with numbers how you arrive at this conclusion? (Solar is extremely popular and viable in Northern Europe, so it surprises me to read it)

Most of the US is in fact better for solar than most of Europe (Iberia is fairly good). However, energy prices in the US are considerably lower, so the bar for profitability is much higher. The EU also has colossal subsidies for renewables, which obviously skew the market. In a purely market-driven world Europe would not be investing in solar.

> In a purely market-driven world Europe would not be investing in solar.

Well, maybe, but there's more to a market than buy and sell price. There is also the cost of external energy dependency, for example, or environmental degradation.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#76

Post by steve76 »

mrguyorama wrote: post #49
rconti wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is USA government policy actively antagonistic towards this specific technology? Or just doesn't have specific support/incentives for this specific kind of technology? Is there any reason the market doesn't/can't support buying these panels here? Or are there weird tariffs against it? IS there not already a boom in solar PV installation in the USA? It looks like we're far from a watts-per-capita leader (15th in the w…

The Republican party in the united states is so anti-green energy, they removed solar panels from the white house in the 80s, shortly after they were installed, just because they didn't like them. They also blamed wind turbines for the extreme grid failure in Texas last year, and it is a current talking point that "wind and solar can't ever work" and that wind turbines kill so many birds that we can't possibly ever u…

[dead]

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#77

Post by Swenrekcah »

Armisael16 wrote: post #72
davedx wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"solar doesn't make sense in many places in the US. You want somewhere dry and bright, which cuts off the pacific northwest, and most of the north*" Can you explain with numbers how you arrive at this conclusion? (Solar is extremely popular and viable in Northern Europe, so it surprises me to read it)

Most of the US is in fact better for solar than most of Europe (Iberia is fairly good). However, energy prices in the US are considerably lower, so the bar for profitability is much higher. The EU also has colossal subsidies for renewables, which obviously skew the market. In a purely market-driven world Europe would not be investing in solar.

In a purely market driven world oil would have been phased out decades ago because of all the negative externalities that the pure and perfect market would have priced in.

I understand your point, I just take issue with the phrasing that subsidies for renewables are skewing the market, since in fact they are rather correcting it. Secondly because the oil industry is subsidised as well.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#78

Post by ajsnigrutin »

Retric wrote: post #16
ttoinou wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16 kg on 3500 kg is nothing and you definitely need 200W and not 40W

The limit is 3500 kg, if you’re at 3300 kg stock then you only have 200kg to play with when retrofitting. Also it’s 200W/m2 but camper roofs are a lot more than 1 square meter so you just cover a larger percentage of the roof with solar.

I'd rather have 5x the power and find a few kilos somewhere else to save.

If efficiencies were within a few percents.. sure.. but when we're talking about a factor of 5+, it doesn't seem to be worth it.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#79

Post by akira2501 »

Swenrekcah wrote: post #77
Armisael16 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the US is in fact better for solar than most of Europe (Iberia is fairly good). However, energy prices in the US are considerably lower, so the bar for profitability is much higher. The EU also has colossal subsidies for renewables, which obviously skew the market. In a purely market-driven world Europe would not be investing in solar.

In a purely market driven world oil would have been phased out decades ago because of all the negative externalities that the pure and perfect market would have priced in. I understand your point, I just take issue with the phrasing that subsidies for renewables are skewing the market, since in fact they are rather correcting it. Secondly because the oil industry is subsidised as well.

> In a purely market driven world oil would have been phased out decades ago because of all the negative externalities that the pure and perfect market would have priced in.

People who say this don't seem to realize that it was only 70 years ago we were just stopping the use of horses and other beasts of burden to do the majority of farming, and of course, replacing them with tractors... or the impact this had on productivity and availability.

Yes.. oil has negative "externalities." It also had massive benefits and created opportunities for expansion that we might not have otherwise had. The purpose of a market isn't to achieve perfect tyranny in the use of all resources, it's to make the best compromise out of the available choices.

Finally, it may just be that we haven't exactly factored in all the negative external components of our new energy choices. The market, if anything, has shown that it is willing to brazenly lie to the entire world if it senses that there is massive profit to be made in it. I don't know why people would expect the elites of green energy to operate any differently than the elites of oil energy have in the past, particularly when the market has made no efforts to induce the kind of perfection you have imagined here.

Re: Paper-Thin Solar Makes Any Surface Photovoltaic

#80

Post by friend_and_foe »

"One hundredth the weight of conventional solar cells, 18 times the energy output per kilogram" this translates to 18% of the output per surface area, which, for solar panels, is the more important metric. The second most important metric is cost, I wofner what the cost per watt output is on these. This of course can go down with scale, and the output can go up with more development.

It's cool, lightweight solar is a pretty great thing.

Post reply on HN