NOV 02

Inflatatable solar? Yeah, sounds kinda fishy, but I've been reading up and I'm starting to think that Cool Earth Solar is for real. They've created a new technology that uses traditional photovoltaics and a new inflatable concentrator. We've seen plenty of mirror concentrators before, but this one is unique because it uses inflatable mirrors that are 400 times cheaper than polished aluminum mirrors.

Also, the solar units are so lightweight that they can be suspended on steel cable lines rather than each having its own base connected to the ground. This rigging system allows for minimal land use disruption, 60 times less steel material and faster installation. The cables double as a control mechanism to align the units toward the sun.

The system is really extremely elegant. The device uses very little actual photovoltaic material, and everything else is dirt cheap. The installation of something like this could even be several hundred feet off the ground, if one didn't want to disturb habitat.

Of course, the balloons would be fragile, and might have to be frequently replaced. If the system weren't perfectly rigid, wind would lower efficiency as the concentrator wouldn't always be perfectly perpendicular to the sun. And, of course, by virtue of the design, they'd be less efficient than more expensive solar concentrators.

Cool Solar Earth says their goal is to match non-renewable power source prices by bringing down the cost of solar, and they say they're going to get there in 3 years. Of course, we've got to be sketical of anything so optimistic, but it's an intriguing idea, and I'd definitely be checking the contents of my wallet if I was in the V.C. market.

Via Next Energy News

Comments (14)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Alien Farmer, November 02, 2007

Inflatable solar arrays may be 25X cheaper but if you have to replace them 25X in 25 years are they really that cheap? Today you can get a 2.4 KW solar system for $16,000 with a coupon from http://www.SolarCoupons.com and next year expect to see systems going for $10 - $12,000.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

materials?
written by James Maddux, November 02, 2007

Something I would like to know is if the material these arrays are made of can be recycled, or even reconstructed into a new cells. It would be an awful irony if these balloons just ended up in landfills.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Neece, November 02, 2007

This sounds so promising. I hope they are successful with lowering the price of solar to something we can all afford.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

GeoffC
written by Geoff, November 03, 2007

What a fantastic idea - The Space Station come to mind!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

solar energy inflatables should fly
written by Tom Myers, November 04, 2007

This can become literally over-the-rainbow technology; make them big enough and lighter than air, and they can carry the generator above the weather where they'll last longer and work all day. Yes, energy transport is then a problem -- I've been scribbling about this on and off at my own blog for a while, and I'm very glad to see real progress being made.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Jim, November 04, 2007

Surely the main problem would be the overheating of the PV cell. They don't work very well at high temperatures. As soon as PV cells that can work at these concentrated temperatures are economically viable most collectors will use them. Most concentrating solar arrays work on thermal principles. The idea of inflatable mirrors is not that new. It may prove to be a cheap way of providing parabolic reflectors but fresnel lenses are already there (as refractors) and can be cheaply etched into glass (a reasonably eco material).

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Tom Myers, November 04, 2007

Jim, I agree in principle, it's just a question of how high a concentration you can get in practice. The Australian 154MW plant supposedly under construction is based on a 500-to-1 concentration; if it works, that saves a whole lot of PV material. One assumes they have working models. Technology Review reported 240-fold a while back. Of course, Fresnel lenses and reflectors are also feasible in principle, but I haven't heard of any proposals for large-scale commercial implementation. Do you know of any?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Australian solar
written by Jim, November 06, 2007

Tom

I believe the Australian plant you talk about is a thermal plant. The reflectors direct light towards a central tower turning water to steam which then drives a turbine. http://www.enviromission.com.a...roject.htm
I agree that the concept for PV will allow less material to be used. Having had a look around the web it does seem that some people have solved the cooling problem and are boasting massive outputs http://www.concentrixsolar.de/cms/english.html, incidently using fresnel lenses. Lets hope the prices become economic quickly to encourage use.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by SunnyBoy, November 20, 2007

Try this. Go to You Tube and search for "solar concentrator" you'll find a video interview of the Acciona Energia VP in charge of the 64 MW "Nevada Solar One" solar thermal power plant. Right before the 2 minute mark, he boasts of using 7 MILLION pounds of Aluminum. Some quick math tells me that they used over 100 lbs of Aluminum per kilowatt of capacity! While this is thermal, the reflector concept and material is approximately similar to concentrated PV systems. And its similar to the Australian solar thermal plant that Tom and Jim were referring to.

Did you know that Aluminim is incredibly energy intensive to manufacture? In this light, ultra light weight film looks really good.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Replacement?
written by Larry James, February 29, 2008

unlikely they would have to be replaced every year since the invention of almost transparent PTFE (think Eden Project in the UK) which should last 20 in the sun.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Laughable idea
written by Jmaximus, March 14, 2008

You would litterally have to replace these ballons all the time. Able to withstand 100 mile wind me shiny metal butt. I doubt if they could withstand a flock of birds landing on them. How about having to refill them after the air leaks out. Thermal power plant mentioned by Sunnyboy may use a lot of Aluminum, but it built to last decades. Nobody in their right mind would spend millions on a farm of these.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

What are you laughing about?
written by Abe, April 04, 2008

Jmaximus

There may be reason to be skeptical of these claims, but keeping the balloons full of air? That doesn't sound like a technological show stopper to me. Put a little pump on there and refill them when they start drooping. Simple as that.

Also, It may seem unbelievable but there are flexible, transparent materials that can survive bird claws. Man has concurred much bigger problems.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

gzsgd
written by MMA, April 29, 2008

yea!!!This can become literally over-the-rainbow technology; make them big enough and lighter than air, and they can carry the generator above the weather where they'll last longer and work all day. Yes, energy transport is then a problem -- I've been scribbling about this on and off at my own blog for a while, and I'm very glad to see real progress being made. :) :) :) :) :) :) :D ;) ;)hah !!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by MMA, April 29, 2008

This can become literally over-the-rainbow technology; make them big enough and lighter than air, and they can carry the generator above the weather where they'll last longer and work all day. Yes, energy transport is then a problem -- I've been scribbling about this on and off at my own blog for a while, and I'm very glad to see real progress being made.
http://www.myfinanceadvisory.com/financial.html

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment