In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:43 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] >Nick, > >Yes, this low efficiency is undoubtedly true for now. > >But here is the (possible) paradigm shift, and I should have tried to explain >my enthusiasm as involving a paradigm shift rather than as a step-wise >improvement. > >Even if the efficiency remains far less than for a dedicated solar panel, with >this kind of shift in economics, that lower efficiency is not the real issue. >When any nearly-transparent film can be applied so thinly and cheaply to >glass, not needing to be crystalline like silicon - then even if the result is >modest efficiency- that is not so big an issue since you are *going to install >a window anyway.* > >IOW - most of the cost is already covered by the main use - and we could be >facing the situation in the next few years when the glass industry says- we >can convert all of the window glass we make into low efficiency electrical >converters for only a little extra cost, in mass production. The graphene >required for this is 'de minimis' due to the thinness, and carbon is cheap. > >"Ditto" for the roofing and ditto for siding industry, not to mention exterior >surface of every automobile, etc. Even painting contractors might get into the >act somehow.
At an energy production of only 1 W/m^2 it won't make much difference. IMO the technology most likely to make the biggest impact in the shortest time is the PHEV. Of course this assumes that concurrently coal fired power stations are replaced by cleaner power sources. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
