Slashdot Mirror
Optical Concentrator To Make Solar Power Cheaper
Al writes "Researchers at a company called Morgan Solar have developed a simple solar concentrator that promises to cut the cost of solar energy. The Light-Guide Solar Optic (LSO) consists of a specially-molded acrylic optic that traps light and guides it toward its center using total internal reflection. At the middle of the concentrator another optic made of glass receives the incoming light, amplifies it and directs it toward a small solar cell at the very center of the device. Unlike other concentrators, the light doesn't leave the optic before striking a solar cell so there's no air gap, and there's no chance of fragile components being knocked out of alignment. This could significantly reduce the cost of manufacturing this type of solar cell."
The original concept here is flat fiberoptics-like lens, so you can transport more concentrators in the same space and there will be no misalignment during assembly, because small pv cell is glued onto back of these lens, not held at a distance.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
... about concentrating solar power.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Watch out for the man with the golden gun...
That's actually pretty cool. By concentrating the light, they need less photovoltaic material per square foot of land used for solar. I'm curious how the efficiency of photovoltaic cells varies with the concentration of light
For a constant temperature, efficiency goes up logarithmically with light concentration. A solar cell with 1 sun on it is going to be less efficient than one with 500 suns on it assuming you have a way to cool the cells. Past a certain point the efficiency drops like a rock due to lack of cooling the cells and this reduces the voltage you can produce by about 2.3mV/C past room temp.
No net decrease in surface area. No proven increase in efficiency.
There's a third axis; cost per watt. Acrylic is cheaper than PV silicon.
(Actually the relationship of surface area and efficiency is fixed, so it's really a second axis.)
-Peter
The one thing I learned about about optics from the elective class I took in college: all lenses look similar, but function very very differently. To evaluate a lens based on how it looks is something like evaluating a microprocessor based on how the die looks.
Not really a lens of any type. Its an example of non imaging optics. A lens, Fresnel or otherwise, or a mirror, produces an image of an object at its focus. So, as the sun moves across the sky, its image would move across the plane of focus. So you'd either have to make that image plane big enough to contain the imaged sun track over a day or move the apparatus. Non imaging optics reflect or refract incoming light rays from any direction on to a single point as well as focus the light from a large aperture onto a smaller area.
While the idea of non imaging optics in general isn't novel, the design of this device might be.
Have gnu, will travel.
If it effected efficiency and lifetime, the situation would be pretty positive.
What you mean is that it affects efficiency and lifetime.
It's not a fresnel lens. The light is reflected internally and concentrated towards the center rather than being refracted towards a focal point some distance away. As always, pictures speak louder than words: http://www.morgansolar.com/images/technology/lgophoto1_full.jpg