Could Enough PV Significantly Cool the Desert?

On 4/8/13 11:45 AM, snipped-for-privacy@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

How profound!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So we have yet another idiot that can't understand that from ground level the Sun is "up", i.e. has a positive elevation angle.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/8/13 12:59 PM, snipped-for-privacy@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

Depends on the coordinate system used, jimp!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For most sane people not on drugs, the reference for elevation angle is 0 degrees for horizontal, 90 degrees for straight up and -90 degrees for staight down.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

vel

How doies that make it impossible to separate wavelengths, sending red to plants and green to tracking PV panels?
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

vel

How does that make it impractical to separate wavelengths, sending red to plants and green to tracking PV panels?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Again, it has nothing to do with that at all.
What makes it impractical for starters is the huge system cost, which includes the stuff necessary to get water to a place where there currently isn't any water.
Are you on drugs?
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Only if you are too stoopid to figger out how to use reflectors & refraction grating.
Care to try again?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That one is so insanely stupid it had me rolling on the floor for a while.
I can just see it: giant Taj Mahal's of mirrors, gratings, and solar panels scattered across the landscape with enough room between them to get the farm machinery to the crops you are going to grow in a place that has no water in the first place.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/7/13 3:57 PM, snipped-for-privacy@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

Hope you didn't hurt yourself down on the floor, jimp. Solar cells don't have to be normal to the sunlight to be useful! :-o
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, they don't have to be normal, you just have to put up with the sin (theta) loss.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ile.

heta)

So what is the sin theta loss of a panel facing 45 degrees to the horizontal _downward_ receiving green light that has been reflected or refracted upward 45 degrees with the horizontal?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Who give a shit?
The cost of all the required machinery to do this would be so high the scheme is guaranteed to lose money no matter what.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

while.

ls

(theta)

"You are vexed therefore I am right about you."
-- Nietzsche
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<snip>
Since you won't let it go...
The best of mirrors reflect about 90% when they are nice and clean.
If you have two relflecting surfaces, you have .9 X .9 X .707 X .707, so you wind up losing 59.5% of the energy from this scheme assuming the panel is normal to the last reflector.
If the panel is at an angle, multiply .405 by the sine of that angle and that is what you would have left.
In reality the mirrors will get dirty so they are going to reflect a lot less than 90% once the system has been in place a day or two.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/8/13 11:40 AM, snipped-for-privacy@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

My diagonal mirror has reflectivity is above 99% over the entire 4000 to 7000 photo-visual range, jimp.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The unstated and obvious condition is that we are talking about commercial grade mirrors ass hat, not hughly expensive labratory grade mirrors.
In any case whether the mirror is 99% or 90% is moot once it has been exposed to the elements for a couple of days.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/8/13 12:57 PM, snipped-for-privacy@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

Wrong again, jimp!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope, not unless you are constantly cleaning all these tracking mirrors.
I guess you missed the part where the clown is talking about a PV system with multiple reflecters where the losses are already going to be very high.
--
Jim Pennino

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

re 4000

cial

e mirrors.

How is that any worse than cleaning PV panels?

What losses?
This would allow cultivation in the summer in places where it is impossible now.
Bret Cahill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.