Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?
From: Rudolf Potucek (potucek_at_ucalgary.ca)
Date: 08/24/04
- Next message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: How much plutonium 320 pounds 700 kg."
- Previous message: Cecil Moore: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- In reply to: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Next in thread: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Reply: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:27:01 GMT
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
> Look at the difference between 'Two Axis Tracking Flat Plate' and 'Two
> Axis Tracking Concentrator'.
>
> http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/redbook/atlas/
>
> If the additional radiation isn't from diffused light for the flat
> plate, what then?
Hmm ... not fair ... a concentrator would presumably increase the
effective solar cell area. Also there is presumably a point where
internal inefficiencies lead to no energy production even when light is
striking the panel surface and the concentrator might lower that point.
Just my $.02,
Rudolf
- Next message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: How much plutonium 320 pounds 700 kg."
- Previous message: Cecil Moore: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- In reply to: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Next in thread: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Reply: Dan Bloomquist: "Re: Solar panel energ vs. incidence angle?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
