They have two axis tracking, which can substantially decrease glare losses but its costs are substantial. Fresnel lenses make sense if you need to have some sort of transparency anyway and the cost of shaping it is low enough that the gains from a higher efficiency, lower area, photovoltaic surface aren't swamped.
However, any time someone sells an item that is supposed to have a large reduction in price due to industrial learning curve, such as this one, and they don't advertise price/volume breakdowns, they aren't as likely to be serious. If you click through their link for sales, you'll get a email. No price list. On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Vorl Bek <[email protected]> wrote: > Can you tell us what is so special about the coolcube? It looks > like just another solar panel, with some fresnel lenses to > concentrate the sunlight. > > I admit I know little about the technical points, but haven't > schemes like this been tried for years? > > Why should your plastic lenses be any better than the ones tried > by lots of others which, from anything I have heard, are not > exactly revolutionizing the energy field. > > I know one place here in town that has a bunch of solar panels on > its roof - no concentrating lenses. He must have spent a bundle on > them, but did not think that concentrating lenses would give him a > bigger bang for his buck. > > Good luck with it. > >
