I'm sure the newspaper got this wrong. It's got to be 0.12 watts per square inch ~= something like 18% efficiency. This would fit with the fact that they say "um, well, of course the big heavy monocrystal cells are still tops in efficiency." That -- more expensive -- kind maxes out around 30%, or maybe 300 watts/m^2.
But nanosolar sheets would generate more watts per pound of material, and per dollar of cost.
If I'm right about this number, one of their standard 10x14 sheets (and on what planet is that rectangle a standard size???) would generate 2.4 Kw at peak (max sunlight), which would be lovely.
And why on Earth do they not have this number on their site? And they're making press announcements to... who? The Hindu? And then getting the numbers wrong by three orders of magnitude?
Um, Earth to NanoSolar. Show me that you know what you're doing.
1. issue a press release to the WSJ.
2. make sure they get the basic numbers right.
3. make 4x8 sheets your standard.
There is a small but growing community of writers who make works freely downloadable online.
Take a look at www.storymania.com. They currently have 4146 works by 1155 writers, in 14 categories.
The site lets you post a review, and read others -- and counts downloads and lets you see that. It seems to me that, especially for Slashdotters, this is the way that publishing ought to work.
If you're a science fiction fan, may I humbly suggest my "series" of two novels? They are "Johnny Reb" and "Air Force One". The easiest way to find them is by clicking on the "Top Title Hits" link on the left side of the front page. Johnny is the top- ranked completed novel on the site. (They call it a novel, but it's really a novella.)
(Johnny -- JNY 013 -- is a Bolo: an AI-driven battle tank. Have you ever read Keith Laumer?)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure the newspaper got this wrong. It's got to be 0.12 watts per square inch ~= something like 18%
... who? The Hindu? And then
efficiency. This would fit with the fact that they say "um, well, of course the big heavy monocrystal cells are still tops in efficiency."
That -- more expensive -- kind maxes out around
30%, or maybe 300 watts/m^2.
But nanosolar sheets would generate more watts per pound of material, and per dollar of cost.
If I'm right about this number, one of their standard 10x14 sheets (and on what planet is that
rectangle a standard size???) would generate 2.4 Kw at peak (max sunlight), which would be lovely.
And why on Earth do they not have this number on their site? And they're making press announcements to
getting the numbers wrong by three orders of magnitude?
Um, Earth to NanoSolar. Show me that you know
what you're doing.
1. issue a press release to the WSJ.
2. make sure they get the basic numbers right.
3. make 4x8 sheets your standard.
There is a small but growing community of
.
writers who make works freely downloadable
online.
Take a look at www.storymania.com
They currently have 4146 works by 1155
writers, in 14 categories.
The site lets you post a review, and read
others -- and counts downloads and lets
you see that. It seems to me that, especially
for Slashdotters, this is the way that
publishing ought to work.
If you're a science fiction fan, may I
humbly suggest my "series" of two novels?
They are "Johnny Reb" and "Air Force One".
The easiest way to find them is by clicking
on the "Top Title Hits" link on the left
side of the front page. Johnny is the top-
ranked completed novel on the site. (They
call it a novel, but it's really a novella.)
(Johnny -- JNY 013 -- is a Bolo: an AI-driven
battle tank. Have you ever read Keith Laumer?)