Alan,
It is suspicious. Glad you called.
However, as for the circuit - extrapolating from the info on their site
seems to indicate that "pyroelectric" pulses occur in the modules and these
are fed back to the cell for some kind of a positive feedback loop.
Perhaps a sharp HV pulse, fed
I called Ultra Solar since they're only 30 miles from me and I have a PV
system in place. The phone number on their web site goes to an anonymous
voice mail box that seems to be full. They're probably defunct.
I don't see how it could work as claimed anyway. It sits in the DC path
between the
That QD thing is similar but probably not the same. I get the feeling that
Quantum Boost is being deliberately coy and deceptive with their disclosure
- which is why I was curious to get more information.
However, it does seem quite significant since it permits old installations
to be upgraded. Fo
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
>> BTW - does anyone have more info on Quantum Boost than is on their website?
>
> Is this the quantum dots that absorb heat?
>
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jz200166y
Here's more
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
> BTW - does anyone have more info on Quantum Boost than is on their website?
Is this the quantum dots that absorb heat?
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jz200166y
BTW - does anyone have more info on Quantum Boost than is on their website?
http://ultrasolar.com/files/QuantumBoost%20Summary.pdf
This could be a significant breakthrough in solar.
It is an add-on which increases the output of exiting cells by 20%. Thus 2.5
kW existing system becomes
Here is a table with the actual numbers for 2003 to 2013:
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_1_1
Click on the "Graph" at the top right for an interesting look at the data.
Then on the box on the top right, "View a pre-generated report" see "1.1.A
Net Generation by
AlanG wrote:
> With an on-line time of 10 hours per day, that's 39% of nameplate rating.
> Averaged over 24 hours, it's 16%.
That is interesting. Thanks for the info. This site says that overall
efficiency for residential installations varies from 13% to 18%, which is
in line with your experie
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:11:15 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>> 4.78 GW is the nameplate capacity.
>
>Wind averages 20 to 30% nameplate. I wonder how well solar fares?
The surface of the planet has an area of 4Pir^2, while the area exposed to the
sun has an area of Pir^2, h
I installed a 2.5 kw system in Feb 2003. The inverter currently shows
38,883 kwh since start-up. That averages to 9.7 kwh/day.
With an on-line time of 10 hours per day, that's 39% of nameplate
rating. Averaged over 24 hours, it's 16%.
AlanG
On 3/6/2014 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
4.78 GW
Just go to pull-a-part and get all their windshield washers.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 6:23 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote:
> 40% of flux Depends how fast your robowasher is. It pays to invest in one of
> the new sprint models
>
>
> On Thursday, March 6, 2014, Terry Blanton wrote:
>>
>> > 4.78 GW is the n
40% of flux Depends how fast your robowasher is. It pays to invest in one
of the new sprint models
On Thursday, March 6, 2014, Terry Blanton wrote:
> > 4.78 GW is the nameplate capacity.
>
> Wind averages 20 to 30% nameplate. I wonder how well solar fares?
>
>
> 4.78 GW is the nameplate capacity.
Wind averages 20 to 30% nameplate. I wonder how well solar fares?
13 matches
Mail list logo