Rawlemon’s Spherical Solar Energy-Generating Globes Can Even Harvest Energy from Moonlight

[Turborama]

Rawlemon’s Spherical Solar Energy-Generating Globes Can Even Harvest Energy from Moonlight
The solar energy designers at Rawlemon have created a spherical, sun-tracking glass globe that is able to concentrate sunlight (and moonlight) up to 10,000 times. The company claims that its ß.torics system is 35% more efficient than traditional dual-axis photovoltaic designs, and the fully rotational, weatherproof sphere is even capable of harvesting electricity from moonlight.



The ß.torics system was invented by Barcelona-based German Architect André Broessel. He sought to create a solar system that could be embedded in the walls of buildings so that they may act as both windows and energy generators. But the project isn’t only noteworthy for its solar efficiency capabilities -  the ß.torics  system is designed to generate lunar energy too!



The spheres are able to concentrate diffused moonlight into a steady source of energy. The futuristic ß.torics system is catching a lot of attention for its clean and beautiful design. (Despite solar power’s huge potential, we haven’t seen too many beautiful solar power technologies). We’re excited to see how architects will incorporate these energy generating orbs into alternative energy agendas and future building designs!


URL to article: http://inhabitat.com/rawlemon%e2%80%99s-spherical-solar-energy-generating-globes-can-even-harvest-energy-from-moonlight/

[Control-Z]

1. So cool!

I want one!

[NoOneMan]

2. How many homes can some sized array of them power?

vs how much carbon it takes to produce them

[AtheistCrusader]

3. Those things are huge. Look solid.

Last edited Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Lot of mass compared to a traditional solar panel.

NVM, filled with water.

[NoOneMan]

4. Yeah, they are purty too

But...how many watts are we talking about? How long until they become carbon neutral? What is their viability in terms of alternative energy?

I guess if its cheaper (carbon wise too) to make a big focusing lens pointing at a small cell, instead of using the entire area to receive with solar panels, then its a good idea (provided the smaller panel can efficiently convert all that light at the same rate of bunch of panels spread out could).

[PamW]

5. How much energy do you "think" is in moonlight?

How much energy do you "think" is in moonlight?

I can tell you - a trivial amount.

No matter how efficient your solar collector is, or how advance; it simply can not harvest energy that is not there.

No matter how advanced the solar collector; it can't violate the laws of physics.

So you can't have a trillionth of a watt of moonlight hitting your advanced solar collector, and have it produce 5 watts of power. It just plain can't happen; because it is a violation of physical law.

The moon sends a trillionth of a watt to your collector and 5 watts came out? Where did that energy come from? ( And please don't get confused about energy per unit area; like the people that "think" you get more energy from sunlight due to the action of a magnifying glass. Such people missed elementary school science where they explain the difference between "intensive" and "extensive" quantities )

The design may look futuristic to scientific neophytes; but to a scientist, it's nothing special.

PamW

[NickB79]

6. According to Google

http://www.ehow.com/about_5723836_moonlight-enough-power-solar-panels_.html

The amount of energy received from the sun is colossal: 342 watts per square meter, on average, over the course of a year. Of this, 31 percent is reflected immediately back into space by reflective surfaces in Earth's atmosphere and on the surface, but the remaining 69 percent is absorbed by the ecosystem. By comparison, the intensity of moonlight per square meter is estimated at 1 milliwatt, approximately 1/342,000th of the amount received directly from the sun.

We're gonna need more globes.

[PamW]

8. You think it's worth it?

Quoting from the Google reference:

By comparison, the intensity of moonlight per square meter is estimated at 1 milliwatt, approximately 1/342,000th of the amount received directly from the sun.

So why would one expend the resources to attempt to extract something that is down by a factor of 342,000 from that of sunlight? It's hardly worth extracting the energy from sunlight.

Solar power is already more costly than other forms of power at our disposal; and you would have us go after a source that delivers 342,000 times less.

Such are the ways of those who think we have infinite resources.

The rest of us know we need to husband resources that yield practical results.

PamW

[NickB79]

9. I posted that to agree with you, not argue with you

Hence the "we're gonna need more globes" line.

[NoOneMan]

10. Gimmick

Thats all it is. Thats why they mentioned moonlight. Thats why they use a huge shiny ball instead of a smaller lens (though a sphere may be useful in a window space). This is another concept to cash in on "greenness" by preying upon iPad wielding consumers who desire an attractive techy future.

[Yo_Mama]

7. Maybe they can generate electricity from moonlight, but damned little

I question the inclusion of this fact in the article - it is surely completely misleading to the average reader?

[JordenLouis]

11. Solar Energy Pictures

Loved these solar pictures. They were all awesome and amazing as well.

[hrmjustin]

12. Welcome to DU JordenLouis!

[stuntcat]

14. Welcome!

yes Welcome to DU JordenLouis

[stuntcat]

13. this is the kind of beautiful thing that makes me think..

makes me think, What if we could go back 30 or 40 years, back to when scientists started warning us, and spend the trillions researching renewables instead of how to drill and frack and dig?
What if we were using only waves and wind and sun now?
Ah but that's my species!, the very image of God we are! #humanity