Time Is Energy

Hedgehog classic

This is too funny! Can't tell if the little guy is exasperated or trippin.

Original found here. Great captions.

posted by Daniel @ 9:14 AM 0 comments

The economics of an iterated V-panel

This post is a follow on to a post from last week. Now that I’ve learned that my international patent application has been published, I can discuss a second idea for building a solar panel with more mirrors than cells. The idea is still patent pending, but it is now in “the public domain” by virtue of its publication.

This idea, fittingly enough builds on the first idea. On several occasions I’ve posted entries on a V-shaped panel design, where the cells are oriented at 45 degrees to the panel cover (rather than parallel) and a mirror is placed opposite the cells. In this case, I iterate the design, by replacing each of the solar cells in the row of solar cells (now at a 45 degree angle to the panel cover) with a rotated cell and mirror pair. The result is a design that used ½ the solar cells by area as a standard panel—a significant savings as I will show.

Unfortunately if mounted in a fixed position the design only collects an equivalent amount of sunlight from ½ the sky. Perfect if the only place you can mount the panel is on the east or west side of a wall, building, mountain or other obstruction (where the panel would in any case not get light from the other half the sky).

But one can also mount the panel on a solar tracking system (1-axis) and have the panel produce power optimally all day. This design offers a trade-off, more power per $ invested in panels over a shorter portion of the day, or all day with the added expense of using solar tracking systems. For people already planning to use solar tracking systems, this design offers clear benefits.

Now let’s look at the economics. To begin with I make the same simple assumptions as before: 1) one square meter = 10 square feet and intercepts 1000 W of sunlight. 2) Solar panels “cost” $3.50 per W (producer wholesale price) and half this cost is due to solar cells ($1.75/W). 3) Mirrors cost $2.50 per square foot. I assume the mirrors reflect 100% of the light for simplicity, but then provide a $/W figure for a 90% reflective mirror in []. Except for the perfect mirror assumption, I believe these are conservative estimates.

So on a square foot basis, 100 W of sunlight hit a solar panel. I then look at two cases: case 1) solar cells are 10% efficient meaning the panel produces 10W per sq. ft.; case 2) solar cells are 20% efficient meaning the panel produces 20W per sq. ft.

Case 1) the cost of a square foot of standard design panel is $17.50 (10W x $1.75/W). With my cell & mirror design, I use 0.5 sq. ft. of solar cell ($17.5 x 0.5 = $8.75) and 1.3 sq. ft. of mirror ($2.5 x 1.3 = $3.25) per sq. ft. of panel. So my design costs $12 to produce the same 10W per sq. ft. which comes to $1.2/W…a 31% savings!
[For a 90% reflective mirror the cost is $1.28W, a 27% savings]

Case 2) the cost of a square foot of standard design panel is $35 (20W x $1.75/W). With my cell & mirror design, I use 0.5 sq. ft. of solar cell ($35 x 0.5 = $17.50) and 1.3 sq. ft. of mirror ($2.5 x 1.3 = $3.25) per sq. ft. of panel. So my design costs $20.75 to produce 20W per sq. ft. which comes to $1.04/W…a 41% savings!
[For a 90% reflective mirror the cost is $1.11W, a 37% savings]

Besides reducing the $ cost of solar, these designs use less silicon which should lead to a shorter EROI (the time it takes for the panel to generate as much energy as was used to produce it) since it takes a lot more energy to produce solar cells than a mirror (or a solar tracker).

If no additional savings can be achieved (I believe additional savings exist) in the “balance of panel” costs, then total panel savings of 15-20% are easily achievable using this design if solar cells are assumed to make up half the price of the solar panel.

While this design is a little more complex (because of the iterative nature of it) than the prior design, it is still relatively straightforward. As far as I’m aware, any known solar cell technology can be used.

Edit 2/25/08: I just discovered that my US patent application published here. The US patent format is slighly easier for me to read.

posted by Daniel @ 2:00 PM 2 comments

Too cute!

A really cute ad for Obama in Texas:

posted by Daniel @ 2:37 PM 0 comments

Savings available with V-shaped solar panel design

I'm planning to attend the Solar2008 conference and exhibit in May in San Diego, CA. I registered for a booth at the exhibit figuring that will be an effective way to get my designs in front of thousands of people interested in solar who are likely to attend. I will show off my V-solar design which I’ve posted about on this site before and possibly other designs. The link has "pretty pictures".

I put together a handy spreadsheet to back up the savings that I project are possible with these designs. Unfortunately I am unable to post a spreadsheet to the blog. I’ve tried posting rows & columns of numbers before and the results are illegible.

So let me attempt to present the info in paragraph form. To begin with I make a few simple assumptions: 1) one square meter = 10 square feet and intercepts 1000 W of sunlight. 2) Solar panels “cost” $3.50 per W (producer wholesale price) and half this cost is due to solar cells ($1.75/W). 3) Mirrors cost $2.50 per square foot. I assume the mirrors reflect 100% of the light for simplicity, but then provide a $/W figure for a 90% reflective mirror in []. Except for the perfect mirror assumption, I believe these are conservative estimates.

So on a square foot basis, 100 W of sunlight hit a solar panel. I then look at two cases: case 1) solar cells are 10% efficient meaning the panel produces 10W per sq. ft.; case 2) solar cells are 20% efficient meaning the panel produces 20W per sq. ft.

In case 1) the cost of a square foot of standard design panel is $17.50 (10W x $1.75/W). With my cell & mirror design, I use 0.7 sq. ft. of solar cell ($17.5 x 0.7 = 12.25) and 0.7 sq. ft. of mirror ($2.5 x 0.7 = 1.75) per sq. ft. of panel. So my design costs $14 to produce the same 10W per sq. ft. which comes to $1.4/W…a 20% savings!
[For a 90% reflective mirror the cost is $1.47W, a 16% savings]

In case 2) the cost of a square foot of standard design panel is $35 (20W x $1.75/W). With my cell & mirror design, I use 0.7 sq. ft. of solar cell ($35 x 0.7 = 24.50) and 0.7 sq. ft. of mirror ($2.5 x 0.7 = 1.75) per sq. ft. of panel. So my design costs $26.25 to produce 20W per sq. ft. which comes to $1.31/W…a 25% savings!
[For a 90% reflective mirror the cost is $1.38W, a 21% savings]

I have performed a similar analysis for other designs that can lower the cost of solar even more.
Besides reducing the $ cost of solar, these designs use less silicon which should lead to a shorter EROI (the time it takes for the panel to generate as much energy as was used to produce it) since it takes a lot less energy to produce a mirror than a solar cell.

If no additional savings can be achieved (I believe additional savings exist) in the “balance of panel” costs, then total panel savings of 10%+ are easily achievable using this design (i.e. half the bolded savings, since solar cells are assumed to make up half the price of the solar panel).

I hope to post a similar analysis in the coming weeks/months for other panel designs. This design discussed in this post is patent pending.

posted by Daniel @ 1:21 PM 3 comments

Nearly there...

As I finish working on this idea for cheaper solar power, I'm wondering just what the impact of cheaper solar panels (up to 50% cheaper!) will be.

Any thoughts?

posted by Daniel @ 4:37 PM 0 comments

Scalia...say no to torture? Absurd!

Amnesty International has a campaign “the America I believe in doesn’t torture”.

I guess it is clear from a recent BBC interview with US Supreme Court Justice Scalia, that he doesn’t support AI’s campaign.

Reading/Listening to the interview, I’m beyond saddened, or ashamed or frustrated, or shocked or outraged, I’m physically and emotionally sickened.

To hear, what should be, one of the greatest judicial minds of our day excusing, rationalizing, spinning, defending…in fact I'd argue he is very nearly justifying torture (in an interview!!!) and this is completely WRONG. It is over the line. It is corrosive to our system of justice.

Even our president is not willing to publicly justify torture.
Our president makes sure the torture (which he prefers to call ‘abuse') happens in secret (wink/nod), while clearly and loudly lying about the fact that it occurs. The president obviously hires and promotes people that are willing to publicly justify/support/encourage/enable/obfuscate, or at the very least avert their eyes, from torture.

But this strikes me as a problem of a completely different order of magnitude. Torture is against the law. One might think a “strict constructionist” juror, like Scalia, could see and apply that.

But Scalia says “Seems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face. It would be absurd to say that you couldn’t do that. And once you acknowledge that, we’re into a different game. How close does the threat have to be and how severe can an infliction of pain be?”

Absurd?

How can anyone see/hear this from a sitting Supreme Court justice and not lose respect for our 3rd branch of government?

To be clear—I understand why well intentioned people might (in a time of crisis) resort to torture—but this is exactly, this is precisely, why we have laws against torture!

posted by Daniel @ 10:58 AM 0 comments

George Orwell was a time traveler...

I remember reading several George Orwell books (over 20 years ago). I loved how he was able to craft a narrative that made preposterous things seem imaginable. Back then we called it satire.

Today (and I mean today) I was struck by the odd notion that perhaps G.O. was really a time traveller. Could he simply have lived through the '00s and traveled back to a simpler time before what we see in our country on a daily basis had happened?

For example, this piece in Slate by Lithwick eloquently sums up the state of torture in on 2/8/2008 in our fair country. Go read it and tell me your head doesn't spin in just the way it does when reading a George Orwell novel.

The other thing I read was a post on Daily Kos about some comments by Dick Cheney's recent speech to CPAC. The double-speak is quite simply profound.

Among the rhetorical gems:

"In his State of the Union message last week, the President set out a confident path forward -- and on that path we're guided by principle. As conservatives, we believe in a government that takes up a smaller share of the national income, that treats tax dollars with respect and restraint. And we believe in a government that keeps to its limits under the Constitution, never expanding beyond the consent of the governed. "

"The United States is a country that takes human rights seriously. We do not torture -- it's against our laws and against our values. We're proud of our country and what it stands for. We expect all of those who serve America to conduct themselves with honor. And we enforce those rules. Some years ago, when abuses were committed at Abu Ghraib prison, a facility that had nothing to do with the CIA program, the abuses that came to light were, in fact, investigated, and those responsible were prosecuted."

If only!

Mr. Orwell, if you are out there...can you take me with you?

posted by Daniel @ 3:04 PM 0 comments

idea for 1/2 price solar

So...I have an idea that could cut the price of solar power by 1/2.

I'm working diligently to file a patent application.

But then what? Any thoughts? Do I just call solar power companies? or call a press conference?

I'm excited, but kinda unsure what to do.

posted by Daniel @ 8:50 PM 0 comments

Just posting for practice...

Not many posts recently...I'm following the election drama, but there is not much to say. (Super) Tuesday will go a long way towards showing what the next few years will be like.

I'm developing a really neat idea related to solar power.
This idea is simple and potentially game changing, but I've gotta zip my lip until the patent is filed which could take a couple weeks.

Oh and I'm about to cross the 2000 visits any day now. :)
I passed 2500 page views last week ;) :)

posted by Daniel @ 9:12 PM 0 comments