• MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    You meant 24%? And i have seen news about 32% years ago, although with concentrating lenses as part of the cell.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      Looking online I’ve seen claims up to 50% but I’ve also seen lots of discussion online about how those numbers can’t be relied on.

        • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          There is 2 things that are measured in efficiency.

          The first thing is as you mentioned, how much of the solar energy is absorbed. 100% would mean that all the solar energy on the surface of the cell would be absorbed.

          The second thing is how much of the absorbed energy of the solar cell is converted into usable energy.

          For a square meter of sun, there is about 1kW of energy, or 1000W.

          If the solar panel of one square meter is efficient at 50% to absorb the solar energy, 500W would be available.

          Then, if the circuitry is 90% efficient at converting the absorbed energy into usable power, you would get 450W of usable power.

          The overall system efficiency is 450W/1000W, or 45%. So 45% of the solar power that hits the solar panel is usable at the output of the whole system.

          This is a really watered down version of how things really work, but that should help you navigate this article.

        • 9bananas@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          i guess, which is why that’s not a thing.

          it would have to convert the photon directly into an electron for 100% efficiency;

          in other words it would require straight-up magic!