The Spanish building integrated PV manufacturer has launched glass-glass modules suitable for rooftops and other urban spaces. The new products have a nominal capacity of 75 W.
If an area requires covering, it might as well produce some power. And cells on the ground aren’t as bad as they’re made out.
I have one laying flat in the yard powering a 12V water pump. Been there for 6-months, covered in pollen and dust, weeds growing over one side, grass cuttings on top, never cleaned, works fine. I have another on my shed roof at our camp. Same deal with the pollen and dust, works fine. But guess which one is easier to clean?
Cells don’t have to be pristine to produce power. And if you do want to clean them? The installation pictured looks easy to work with a garden hose and squeegee, couldn’t take 30 minutes. Use concrete instead? OK, now you have to power wash it. What a pain.
The cells ability to produce power is directly related to how much light it gets. You’d be able to measure it. Take a reading as is. Then remove the weeds, take a reading. Then clean it, take a reading. Then point it at the sun so it’s as perpendicular as you can get it, take a reading. Each time you should see an increase in output.
Panels on the ground that people are going to walk in (or drive) are going to be prone to damage. I’m fact, they’ve already done ground solar panel installations and they’ve all failed as far as I know. When placed above, you don’t need to over engineer it to survive things. Concrete, can handle a lot more wear and tear, as well as being easy to repair and recycles really well.
Basically, there’s an objectively better way to use the panels.
Yeah but now you don’t have a terrace you have something that’s in permanent shade. Long story short: People still want to be able to see the sky. You can, in principle, plaster a whole city with solar pavers, you can’t cover it all in solar roofs.
Things like solar roadways don’t make sense because a) cars much less trucks are way more destructive and b) you don’t really need to see the sky when driving. But a terrace? If there’s any place for ground solar, then there. The question isn’t whether it’s a good solar installation, the question is whether it’s a good terrace paving and if the extra costs are made up for by electricity production then sure, why not.
Y’all missing the whole point here.
If an area requires covering, it might as well produce some power. And cells on the ground aren’t as bad as they’re made out.
I have one laying flat in the yard powering a 12V water pump. Been there for 6-months, covered in pollen and dust, weeds growing over one side, grass cuttings on top, never cleaned, works fine. I have another on my shed roof at our camp. Same deal with the pollen and dust, works fine. But guess which one is easier to clean?
Cells don’t have to be pristine to produce power. And if you do want to clean them? The installation pictured looks easy to work with a garden hose and squeegee, couldn’t take 30 minutes. Use concrete instead? OK, now you have to power wash it. What a pain.
The cells ability to produce power is directly related to how much light it gets. You’d be able to measure it. Take a reading as is. Then remove the weeds, take a reading. Then clean it, take a reading. Then point it at the sun so it’s as perpendicular as you can get it, take a reading. Each time you should see an increase in output.
Panels on the ground that people are going to walk in (or drive) are going to be prone to damage. I’m fact, they’ve already done ground solar panel installations and they’ve all failed as far as I know. When placed above, you don’t need to over engineer it to survive things. Concrete, can handle a lot more wear and tear, as well as being easy to repair and recycles really well.
Basically, there’s an objectively better way to use the panels.
Yeah but now you don’t have a terrace you have something that’s in permanent shade. Long story short: People still want to be able to see the sky. You can, in principle, plaster a whole city with solar pavers, you can’t cover it all in solar roofs.
Things like solar roadways don’t make sense because a) cars much less trucks are way more destructive and b) you don’t really need to see the sky when driving. But a terrace? If there’s any place for ground solar, then there. The question isn’t whether it’s a good solar installation, the question is whether it’s a good terrace paving and if the extra costs are made up for by electricity production then sure, why not.