From my point of view so much of this thread misses the point, left brain technical, engineer thinking verses right brain holistic, humanistic thinking.
It should have nothing to do with the risks of fossil fuels verses anything else. The point is that the burning of carbon based materials for energy production is bringing us closer and closer to a titanic climate disaster and we have very little time left to prevent it. It threatens civilization and possibly human survival. The burning of fossil fuels must stop so the only relevant question is how to replace the needed energy they now supply.
There are two main alternatives, nuclear and renewables and into which massive efforts must be poured. That only renewables can and must win that race could not be more obvious to me. It's where all the acceleration is to be found as well as decreasing costs across the board. It is where the investment, talent, and plans are most being made. It is already happening. It is something the public puts on their roofs when they can afford it. It appeals to the conscious of parents who think of the future of their children. It can't be turned easily into a weapon or sabotaged to produce an ecological disaster. It does not need to be built next to oceans and rivers or use pipe corroding molten salts for cooling. The area used can have multiple uses including water efficient greenhouse pesticide free organic food. No toxic waste to dream one can safely store for tens of thousands of thousands of years.
At this point renewables are a better investment than nuclear.Oh OK, so we'll just stop using all fossil fuels tomorrow and then snap our fingers and install our choice of substitutes...also tomorrow.
Sorry, that is not how it works. In the real world, if we do not use nuclear it's going to slow reduction of carbon emissions. In fact, not commissioning new nuclear plants already has slowed it down.
There's plenty of uranium around. It's almost, but not quite, cost-effective to extract it from seawater. It might make economic sense to extract lithium at the same time.again
Plus there is not enough fission material to go around… If we go for the nuclear long term its really fusion or bust.
I didn't say anything about stopping using nuclear tomorrow. I said build more renewable plants and stop trying to build more nuclear. It takes too long and is to expensive in addition to a host of other negatives.Oh OK, so we'll just stop using all fossil fuels tomorrow and then snap our fingers and install our choice of substitutes...also tomorrow.
Sorry, that is not how it works. In the real world, if we do not use nuclear it's going to slow reduction of carbon emissions. In fact, not commissioning new nuclear plants already has slowed it down.
Sounds great, as long as there isn't a catch.Not gonna make another energy thread so gon spam this one.
Did we get an early Christmas present this year?
This sounds *AWESOME* (solar .. so guess its covered by the fusion headline).
Paper-thin solar cell can turn any surface into a power source
MIT researchers developed a scalable fabrication technique to produce ultrathin, flexible, durable, lightweight solar cells that can be stuck to any surface. Glued to high-strength fabric, the solar cells are only one-hundredth the weight of conventional cells while producing about 18 times more...news.mit.edu
One catch: "They are one-hundredth the weight of conventional solar panels, generate 18 times more power-per-kilogram." I take that to mean they only produce about 18% as much power per unit area. Real world durability will be interesting to see as well. But then flexible solar panels would be a huge break through. Especially if they could provide their own conductors over a useful distance, like 50 feet, could dramatically reduce installation costs.Sounds great, as long as there isn't a catch.
I agree, if there is a catch it’s the power per unit area. They avoided mentioning that metric. Still there’s going to be a some good use cases for lightweight flexible solar panels.One catch: "They are one-hundredth the weight of conventional solar panels, generate 18 times more power-per-kilogram." I take that to mean they only produce about 18% as much power per unit area. Real world durability will be interesting to see as well. But then flexible solar panels would be a huge break through. Especially if they could provide their own conductors over a useful distance, like 50 feet, could dramatically reduce installation costs.
I could see something like a wrap-around cheapo skin for electric vehicles, drones, etc, or like wearable electronics. Certainly not going to be roofing buildings with it though. Might be useful in space as well where weight is a premium.One catch: "They are one-hundredth the weight of conventional solar panels, generate 18 times more power-per-kilogram." I take that to mean they only produce about 18% as much power per unit area. Real world durability will be interesting to see as well. But then flexible solar panels would be a huge break through. Especially if they could provide their own conductors over a useful distance, like 50 feet, could dramatically reduce installation costs.
Parking lot covers could be a good use for them, assuming that they are at least as durable as the baseline fabric. There are quite a few lots around here with that type of cover. Also might work for back packing to charge electronics.I could see something like a wrap-around cheapo skin for electric vehicles, drones, etc, or like wearable electronics. Certainly not going to be roofing buildings with it though. Might be useful in space as well where weight is a premium.
Indeed. What they do say is this:I agree, if there is a catch it’s the power per unit area. They avoided mentioning that metric. Still there’s going to be a some good use cases for lightweight flexible solar panels.
16 oz duck canvas is what you use for Cornhole bags. 15 or 16 oz vinyl coated nylon is what they use on bounce houses too. Pretty heavy fabric.Indeed. What they do say is this:
“A typical rooftop solar installation in Massachusetts is about 8,000 watts. To generate that same amount of power, our fabric photovoltaics would only add about 20 kilograms (44 pounds) to the roof of a house,” he says.
This seems to imply that a typical roof has enough area to provide the same 8,000 watts but I wonder. Is the article there to stimulate investment, to generate hype concealing the watts per area factor, or the result of simply a lack of critical thinking on the part of the author?
What we know:
The average weight of a 365 watt monocrystalline solar panel is 45 pounds.
To establish a 10 kW system you will need a total of 28 solar panels mounted on top of your roof.
We know that one 365 watt solar panel weighs 45 pounds and takes up an area of 20,7 square feet.
Therefore, 28 solar panels will take up an area of 580 square feet and will weigh a total of 1260 pounds.
1260 pounds ÷ by 580 square feet = 2.17 pounds per square foot. When you take into account mounting equipment, you can raise the weight per square foot to about 3.5 pounds.
This means a 10 kW solar system (with mounting equipment) will weigh 3.5 pound per square feet.
8,000 watts would require approx. 477 sq feet of such panels or 1035 lbs.
I don't see anything about how much area 44 lbs of the photovoltaic fabric covers.
At 1lb a sq yard, like canvas sail of that weight 44 lb would require 406 Sq feet.
If these numbers are right or anything close looks like it could less area than a normal solar roof.
16 oz/sq.yd. is heavy cloth for a sail from my understanding of what I read.
16 oz duck canvas is what you use for Cornhole bags. 15 or 16 oz vinyl coated nylon is what they use on bounce houses too. Pretty heavy fabric.
Then a 16 oz photovoltaic solar fabric of the type described would produce 8000 watts with a smaller area than typical solar panels at a fraction of the weight. So it is a big deal. It would be fantastic for greenhouses to heat to cool and to shade.16 oz duck canvas is what you use for Cornhole bags. 15 or 16 oz vinyl coated nylon is what they use on bounce houses too. Pretty heavy fabric.
OK: https://www.rechargenews.com/energy...-factory-to-reshape-energy-system/2-1-1379772Not gonna make another energy thread so gon spam this one.
Did we get an early Christmas present this year?
This sounds *AWESOME* (solar .. so guess its covered by the fusion headline).
Paper-thin solar cell can turn any surface into a power source
MIT researchers developed a scalable fabrication technique to produce ultrathin, flexible, durable, lightweight solar cells that can be stuck to any surface. Glued to high-strength fabric, the solar cells are only one-hundredth the weight of conventional cells while producing about 18 times more...news.mit.edu
The fabric they were talking about though is specifically designed to be very strong and light, though.Then a 16 oz photovoltaic solar fabric of the type described would produce 8000 watts with a smaller area than typical solar panels at a fraction of the weight. So it is a big deal. It would be fantastic for greenhouses to heat to cool and to shade.
Cooling a greenhouse in a hot climate you could even produce atmospheric water and recapture that produced by plant transpiration.
Hell, I remember reading about molten sodium-sulfur batteries almost sixty years ago in Popular Science. Stuff's hot!There's lots of battery development going on lately. Cheaper than lithium, sodium-ion batteries are in production, and should be in your next car whether it's an EV or a hybrid. (I don't know if they will be, but they should be.)
I also saw a story somewhere about someone trying molten sodium-sulfur batteries again for storage like the iron-air batteries above. They're cheap in theory, but you have to keep them hot.
There's lots of battery development going on lately. Cheaper than lithium, sodium-ion batteries are in production, and should be in your next car whether it's an EV or a hybrid. (I don't know if they will be, but they should be.)
I also saw a story somewhere about someone trying molten sodium-sulfur batteries again for storage like the iron-air batteries above. They're cheap in theory, but you have to keep them hot.
I agree with you here. I did the calculations myself from the information given using a fairly heavy weight for the cloth. Sail cloth can be rather lighter than the number I used. I made the assumption that one sq yard of cloth equals one sq yard of photovoltaic fabric and the ratio of weight to power but I could have made a math or a conceptual mistake in there somewhere. The only answer I can think of to explain the vagueness is that they don't really know because they have not made anything from fabric the size of a solar panel yet. I also don't think they have worked out how to protect the dyes from long term exposure to the elements.The fabric they were talking about though is specifically designed to be very strong and light, though.
Either way it be a cool technology, but I'm guessing if the efficiency was near typical panels they would've said that instead of dancing around the subject.
Regarding modular nuclear hope:
The Nuclear Fallacy: Why Small Modular Reactors Can't Compete With Renewable Energy - CleanTechnica
Will the small modular nuclear reactor community be able to find an optimized point on the physics vs modularity curve? I don't think so.cleantechnica.com
I saw that. Think I read one plant ready to go in 2029.NRC Certifies First U.S. Small Modular Reactor Design
NuScale power module becomes the first SMR design certified by the NRC.www.energy.gov
kind of related but they just certified the first Modular reactor
The VOYGR nuclear power plant projects that both Romania and Poland will develop, in cooperation with NuScale, will have six modules, each with an installed capacity of 77 MWe. NuScale's SMR technology is the first to have gained approval from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in August 2020
All those lovely almost endless nucleotides.I think Romania is going to be a testing ground for the SMR. Hopefully it's a success
Romanian-Polish cooperation on NuScale SMR deployment : New Nuclear - World Nuclear News
Romanian utility Nuclearelectrica and Polish copper and silver producer KGHM Polska Miedź SA have signed a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding for cooperation in the development of small modular reactors. Both companies have previously signed agreements with NuScale of the USA on the...www.world-nuclear-news.org