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

The future of solar doesn't track the sun

terraformindustries.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 154 posts

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#101

Post by Havoc »

adamcharnock wrote: post #66

I just spent 6 years living off-grid, running 5kw of solar, and 14kWh of storage. I setup a fixed array that I welded together myself. I could certainly see that tracking wasn't worth it even then. However, in the off grid-setting I did discover some nuance. Sometimes you could really do with some power around sunset or sunrise. In the winter, being able to more reliably run my air-source heat pump at sun-up would ha…

Some of that you can solve with dual side vertical panels mixed in. Obviously murders their output but you get it when it matters - on the shoulders of the day

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#103

Post by Havoc »

jules wrote: post #98

I don't understand how east-west arrays differ much from just a flat area. At the end of the day, don't they capture all sunlight in some large square? The east-west array only captures a bit differently around the outer edges. Can somebody explain? Is solar panel efficiency that dependent on incidence angle?

The panel isn’t a perfectly flat two dimensional structure. So light hitting at an angle isn’t equally effective

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#104

Post by derriz »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #14
rini17 wrote: post #2

When panels are cheap what about vertical mounting? Less susceptible to hail and snow. And maybe placed north-south, to maximize production in morning and evening when it's needed most.

The article seems to be mostly about grid scale solar. Of course an increasing amount is private or domestic solar installed on e.g. building roofs or wherever there is space. When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installing solar on it. It stops being about what is the most efficient and starts being abou…

“When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installing solar on it.”

I don’t see the logic? As panel prices drop, installation costs start dominating overall cost of energy produced and so economic pressures will be on simpler and simpler PV installations. Laying a panel almost flat on the ground amongst thousands of others will be a cheaper process - both initially and in terms of ongoing maintenance - than anything that involves sending workers up ladders or cherrypickers attaching and wiring a panel onto the side of a building.

So grid scale will start to dominate over domestic or “novelty” (e.g. floating panels on reservoirs) and simpler and simpler approaches to installation (like removing tracking) will become attractive.

These effects are already apparent. Basically the opposite of what you’re predicting?

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#105

Post by givinguflac »

sneak wrote: post #81
UltraSane wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the appeal of living off-grid?

You don’t have to be around other people, and all the hassles that human society and population density entail. Some people are really into that. I’m really into same-day Amazon delivery and 30 minute latency on fresh pizza that I didn’t have to cook.

I just wanted to say thank you for the phrase “30 minute latency on fresh pizza”

I’d never considered it latency but you’re right and it’s hilarious.

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#107

Post by hnaccount_rng »

derriz wrote: post #104
jillesvangurp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article seems to be mostly about grid scale solar. Of course an increasing amount is private or domestic solar installed on e.g. building roofs or wherever there is space. When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installing solar on it. It stops being about what is the most efficient and starts being abou…

“When cost drops low enough, any surface with any exposure to sunlight is in scope for installing solar on if it can yield more energy than the cost of installing solar on it.” I don’t see the logic? As panel prices drop, installation costs start dominating overall cost of energy produced and so economic pressures will be on simpler and simpler PV installations. Laying a panel almost flat on the ground amongst thousa…

Installation costs dominate largely due to one-off things (getting the contractor/customer, roof access, adapting to bespoke roof layout, etc) which are disproportionately larger for smaller installation sizes. However for new construction those things are essentially free. So yes, I’d absolutely expect that solar will be added during larger rebuilds. But that is not an effective way of “deploying solar”

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#108

Post by atoav »

didgetmaster wrote: post #97
weinzierl wrote: post #6

We researched this thoroughly in the early 2000s and came to pretty much the same conclusion even back then. For us the main problem was the reliability of the mover. If enough panels face the wrong direction for long enough it is worse than facing the sun in a good enough fixed position all the time. Our angle was to use a simple motor that runs with constant speed and use a special patented gear (called VIAX) to tu…

I always thought that someone would invent a cheap, simple, reliable, and passive tracking system. No need for sensors or intelligent electronics. You have a simple motor that slowly tilts the array from facing East to facing West as power is being generated. The motor does not start until the panel is generating a certain amount of power. The motor runs at a fixed rate with a screw that takes about 7 hours to move t…

Good idea but has one major drawback: Shadows cast on single panels mid sequence would offset the angle. But majbe it is still worth it.

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#109

Post by perilunar »

rsync wrote: post #95
lm28469 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans basically live like energy is unlimited, free and has no side effects, the rest of the world doesn't have that chance, last time I checked the average US household used anywhere between 3x and 4x more electricity than the average EU household They tend to prefer huge houses with relatively complex designs (less optimal in term of area/volume ratio) / poor insulation, they make up for it by relying on tech f…

"Americans basically live like energy is unlimited, free and has no side effects ..." Agreed - and guilty as charged which is why we're switching entirely to solar. (I will also note that my household "cheats" by living in California where we need relatively little heat and do not even own an air conditioner so our path is, perhaps, a bit easier) My main point is that whether you're a frugal EU council house or a pro…

It's good that your daily "30A dryer" usage will soon be solar powered. I have a solar-powered clothes dryer too — it's called a clothesline.

Re: The future of solar doesn't track the sun

#110

Post by lm28469 »

rsync wrote: post #95
lm28469 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans basically live like energy is unlimited, free and has no side effects, the rest of the world doesn't have that chance, last time I checked the average US household used anywhere between 3x and 4x more electricity than the average EU household They tend to prefer huge houses with relatively complex designs (less optimal in term of area/volume ratio) / poor insulation, they make up for it by relying on tech f…

"Americans basically live like energy is unlimited, free and has no side effects ..." Agreed - and guilty as charged which is why we're switching entirely to solar. (I will also note that my household "cheats" by living in California where we need relatively little heat and do not even own an air conditioner so our path is, perhaps, a bit easier) My main point is that whether you're a frugal EU council house or a pro…

> we - all of us - will continue to invent new demands for energy and continue to trend towards more energy used per person per unit time.

I'm personally in the process of designing my house and I'm going for maximal energy efficiency: 38cm thick brick walls + 20cm thick rock wool insulation, basic rectangular shape, 80% of the windows to the south, triple pane, heat recovery unit coupled with a air/earth heat exchanger to avoid needing a resistance to pre warm the air in winter, heat pump water heater, catalytic wood stove

Although I would agree that overall people don't give a shit and I probably am in the minority

Post reply on HN