Comments on: Rice unveils super-efficient solar-energy technology

By: Nick Radonic

Nick Radonic — Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:13:23 +0000

And if you boil off water, you leave behind salts and calcium deposits. That would tend to gunk up the nanocrystals, rendering them unusable. I can forsee a lot of flushing steps that waste energy.

Maybe we need a water purification step first.

By: gaoptimize

gaoptimize — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 02:55:19 +0000

Fresnel lenses for the dishaphobes.

By: AZryan

AZryan — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 22:46:14 +0000

That doesn’t make sense to me. I think she said it collected 80-90% of the light that hits it. She didn’t say that 24% of the light is gathered and then 90% of that is turned into steam energy. Did she even say 24% anything at all in that video? I didn’t think so.

By: AZryan

AZryan — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 22:41:19 +0000

I hope you’re joking? Many home community bylaws prohibit satellite dishes on people’s roofs because enough people hate them to try to ban them. Thankfully, that’s illegal so people can have them up there anyway (under 3′ dia I think?)
Just saying there’s actual evidence that many people would HATE these things on roofs. It would need a large redesign for homes IMO.
The one in the vid looks so large it would need to go on the ground -not that a lab design means much. Maybe they could make a long half-tube type model instead of a round dish. That might work along the edge of a roof.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:23:36 +0000

Answer’s pending ;)

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:19:23 +0000

I agree. Gödel was such a prick! I hate him.

I see no contradiction there though.

what? uh? who said that?

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:17:04 +0000

Which is the original sense of thinking, and which is the sense I used?

Maybe you can clarify what YOU “think”, so that I can answer properly.

Ps: Well: “Thought generally refers to any mental or intellectual activity involving an individual’s subjective consciousness.”
Wiki.

This is the kind of thinking I meant.Which also means my first comment described something that could be the end-result of a thinking process.

So, what’s your “original” sense of thinking?I guess the colloquial meaning of “being right (if not, you didn’t think enough/right) or having “common sense”"; or whatever.Which would explain your dumb comment about my first comment.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:11:40 +0000

Depends on your purpose/intent.

But in general, it doesn’t matter.Do you feel smart because of this question?

It is the kind of thing kids sometimes do to feel smart: Seeing if a claim includes itself in a seemingly contradicting way.

“There is no absolute truth”- really?

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:09:11 +0000

in the original sense of “thinking”? or the one you used?

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:07:38 +0000

Exactly. To most at least. Which is a good thing.
But wait, does this also means the opinion my opinion doesn’t matter doesn’t matter?

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:52:16 +0000

“This makes even less sense.”

Only to someone who “thinks” like you.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:51:39 +0000

“Just as much as they care about you;-)”

You see.Your opinion doesn’t matter.

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:50:05 +0000

This makes even less sense.

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:48:25 +0000

Just as much as they care about you;-)

By: Gorden Russell

Gorden Russell — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:36:11 +0000

That’s a great idea, Rob Fleming, except that the revenours or revanewers, (however you spell it) are up there with drones, looking for stills. That mirror will be a dead giveaway.

By: Gorden Russell

Gorden Russell — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:32:58 +0000

It would be cooler than solar cells, a real status symbol. All the neighbors will want one.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:15:59 +0000

Seriously.If you don’t call it thinking it must be almost perfect.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:10:50 +0000

@Marcos: Who cares about you?It is not as if you’re smart^^

By: Vin

Vin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:09:03 +0000

ah, my completely off-grid living fantasy seems to be closer. But wow, how you become a professor of so many abstruse disciplines in just one lifetime is completely beyond my ken!

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:44:05 +0000

I would not call that “thinking”.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:07:53 +0000

Cool but would not look as nice as solar panels on a roof.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:23:25 +0000

I believe it’s 80-90% of the energy from the 24% of solar energy gathered is used to turn water into steam.

By: asiwel

asiwel — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:20:03 +0000

In the video she said 80%-90% of the thermal energy actually absorbed by the nanoparticles – I guess that is different from the total amount of energy available in the incident light from the sun.

By: asiwel

asiwel — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:08:11 +0000

How long will the nanoparticles last? Do they degrade or wear out or get lost?It looks sort of like gravity is holding them near the bottom of the tube in the fluid at the light focal point. What happens to the waste particles, etc., in the water when used for desalination or waste treatment? How are these collected/disposed of? When they say “…[the] new nanoparticles are activated by both visible sunlight and shorter wavelengths that humans cannot see…”, does that meanwhile ultraviolet light energy? Or did they mean “longer” wavelengths and infrared energy>

By: Rob Fleming

Rob Fleming — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:04:42 +0000

Seems like the applications mentioned are a very small subset of the possibilities. Making booze (“sunshine”, not “moonshine”) comes to mind……..
What other distributed/off the grid process heat requirements might this meet?

By: gaoptimize

gaoptimize — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:29:32 +0000

They are going to have a tough time working around the Leidenfrost effect. Maybe operating at an increased pressure would minimize the insulating gas boundary layer?

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:57:54 +0000

One could think this article is about biotechnology.

By: Bri

Bri — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:53:30 +0000

In the video, the speaker say’s that the efficiency is 80 to 90%. in the article it say’s that it’s overall efficiency is 24%.what’s causing the loss?