Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment They do, but it's stupid. (Score 2) 211

http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg...
Selecting Berlin, for a 2-axis tracking mount, a 1kW panel outputs on average over the year 1300kWh, or 15% or so of nominal expected power.
This is questionably above 900kWh (11%) for a non-pointed much simpler static mount.
However.
7776 'solar cells' - these are not solar panels.
The pictured thing looks very much like a simple fixed vertical panel.
This would come out to 700kWh or so/kWp of panel.

If we assume they talk of germany - 'up to 30000kWh/year' would mean you'd need 42kW of solar panel.
This would be around 230m^2.
Checking https://vimeo.com/154154924 - it gives dimensions of 25*5.5m. This is 137m^2.
This sort of vertically oriented panel is relatively insensitive to position on the earth - as it gets worse as you go towards the equator.

Ew. I think I see what they're doing.
If you cover a vertical panel of 25*5m in solar panels, and point is south/north, then you get 17000 out of the south-pointing, and 4290 out of the south.
This is (in Berlin) 21300.
If however, we put this in the sunniest part of Spain, we get about 28000, which could hit 30000 with optimistic assumptions.

It's a truly terrible design though from most aspects.
If we take 50kWp of solar panels in this design, and simply lay them out flat pointed southish and inclined, we get not 21000 in Berlin, but 48000.

Putting it in the sunniest part of spain gets you 78000.

The numbers for this also work for '7776' solar cells. Conventional solar cells used in panels produce about 6W for the cream of the crop.

Comment Re:should be interesting (Score 2) 325

Journalists unfortunately, need to get paid. If, when you are making a feature of some form, and waiting for 20 responses to FOIA - if someone comes along and writes an article on the first 15, you're pretty much screwed, and don't get paid (directly, or your employer) this means less investigative journalism. Journalism is pretty much dying - especially investigative journalism like this.

Comment Re:Mdsolar strikes again with unrealistic FUD (Score 1) 346

Err - no.
The reason the overcapacity is needed 'now' is to permit development of load-shifting from coast-coast.
This could be in the next several years, as it would become viable and profitable to source power from the opposite coast.
Without the network overcapacity to support this, any investment dies as it would first need to build out the network - which individual schemes can't hope to do.

Comment Re:Mdsolar strikes again with unrealistic FUD (Score 2) 346

The problem with arguing 'the market will sort it out' is that it doesn't allow for things like this.
If you are installing a HVDC element into the network, you will never size it to be significantly larger than now required.
Advanced planning to provide for future needs in some manner is pretty much required, or what happens is what's lead to the increasing issues with the grid - smart people reducing the margins to bare bone.
So, where building 3* the capacity for 1.3* the price may be possible initially, that's not going to happen if there is not an absolute requirement to do so, or funding.

Comment Re:Bad research (Score 5, Informative) 274

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
RESULTS:

Male sex, being physically active, and good health status were independently associated with light to moderate drinking (P .001). An apparent protective effect of light to moderate drinking on mortality was evident in the unadjusted analysis and after adjusting for age, sex, risk factors, and cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-0.88, P .001), but after also adjusting for PASE and VAS, the relationship was no longer significant (aHR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.80-1.05, P = .19). Follow-up physical activity was associated with baseline alcohol consumption; baseline physical activity did not predict alcohol consumption during follow-up.
CONCLUSION:

After accounting for health status and physical activity, light to moderate alcohol drinking had no direct protective effect on mortality.

Comment Re:Bad research (Score 5, Informative) 274

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
Moderate Alcohol Consumption Is Not Associated with Reduced All-cause Mortality.
"During 206,966 person-years of follow up, 7902 individuals died. No level of regular alcohol consumption was associated with reduced all-cause mortality. The hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval in fully adjusted analyses was 1.02 (0.94-1.11) for 7 drinks/week, 1.14 (1.02-1.28) for 7 to 14 drinks/week, 1.13 (0.96-1.35) for 14 to 21 drinks/week, and 1.45 (1.16-1.81) for 21 drinks/week.
CONCLUSIONS:

Moderate alcohol consumption is not associated with reduced all-cause mortality in older adults. The previously observed association may have been due to residual confounding."

Slashdot Top Deals

The herd instinct among economists makes sheep look like independent thinkers.

Working...