• i_need_your_bones@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Such a solarpunk vibe for everything inside to be tinged orange from your windows power generation. Absolute shame that this isn’t really that useful just cool. No way a house with these would generate significant power

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      It wouldn’t really need to generate “significant” power. At least, not in terms of whole-home power. Something like this could easily generate and store enough power for an auxiliary system, something like overnight lighting. Basically the same principle as those solar lawn lamps, but for inside. Wire 'em all to a battery and a bunch of lights and light/motion sensors throughout the home, and you’ve got automatic nightlights that work even when the power’s out.

      • tpyo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        I have two sets of solar lights on my balcony that put out enough light to easily navigate by and it’s one of the things in my place that was truly “set and forget”. Having something passively collecting energy to use for later is nothing to sniff at

        • reptar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I mean, hey, solar powered calculators may have legitimately advance technology timelines.

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I figure the key would be finding a way to make these cost less (including upkeep/replacement over time) than the marginal energy generation capabilities.

      On that note, I’m sure there’s a reason besides “everyone else is too stupid to think of it” but I wonder why solar window shutters aren’t a thing.

      • Mok98@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 days ago

        Since usually sun is up, panels on roof more efficient, solar panel window or panel on shutter is like panel on wall but worse because window and shutter can open and close. When panel on wall will make sense then maybe window and shutter will appear. I have the ability of more eloquence, but why many word when few word do trick?

        • reptar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Is that a purely cost effectiveness thing or is concentration of photons necessary for conversion? I guess I’m asking if these work through multiphoton absorption or just single photon? If it’s the first, is a lens array an option. Ignoring cost, that is (although it is impressive what can be done on the cheap)?

          I’m sure these questions are solar 101 from 1935, but maybe you know!

          • Mok98@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s always a cost effectiveness thing when it comes to photovoltaic panels. Regarding the second question I’m not certain, the panel should be always producing some energy from the light it gets hit from, but the voltage needs to be beyond a certain threshold to be used. And since the voltage depends on the light intensity the positioning of the panel affects a lot the total power that can be actually used in a day. Lenses(?) and mirrors can improve the production but they have to be pointed to the panel, and since the sun moves they have to move too, and the mechanisms to make them move make the whole thing more complicated and probably expensive than simply buying a second panel. That said solar towers exist (look them up they look cool) but they don’t rely on photovoltaics but instead use the heat to boil water and pass the steam through a turbine to produce electricity.

            • reptar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Thanks homie - I think you’re right about cost effectiveness. I guess I also have in mind nothing is cost effective until it is. I’ve been reading a lot of sci fi.

              My prior career was very optically based so some general concepts are field adjacent for me. So my interest is informed in a “knows just enough to be dangerous” kind of way

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I wonder why solar window shutters aren’t a thing.

        Because the source of light is mostly up in the sky, and solar panels work best when they are mostly perpendicular to the direction the light is shining.