On 19 Jul 2001, at 11:47, Dan Minette wrote:
> > On 17 Jul 2001, at 20:51, Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> > <snip (about solar power)>
> > > Projecting this type of improvement, we might have a competitive
> > > power
> > > system in 50 years. We may also hit the slow part of the growth
> > > curve. My guess is that a fundamental breakthrough (like
> > > transistors replacing vacuum tubes) will be needed for effective
> > > solar power. That
> >
> > Lessie..you mean like growing them in zero-G, where you can get
> > pannels which are AT LEAST 3-4 times as efficient, and some trials
> > suggest as much as 7-8 times....
> >
>
> Since the best panels grown in a lab are about 30% efficient, I find
> this very hard to believe. Indeed, if true, it would be a perpetual
> motion machine of the first kind. :-) What is the cost per watt of
> peak power if 100% efficient panels grown in space? If you assume a
> factor of 10 improvement in the cost of shipping up to space and back,
> what would the costs per watt of peak power be?
>
The lab-grown ones may be, but the commonly avaliable ones are
lucky to top 12%, I believe...
Yes, you CAN grow better ones, but it costs.
And yes, I know it costs to ship to space and back. If you're going
to ship it back and not use it to generate energy up there,
anyway..lots of space industry could be useful and ship down
things which ARE worth the money, like chemicals, until the proce
drops enough to make shipping solar panels down worthwhile..
Andy
Dawn Falcon
