Start playing Fishing Clash for free on your iOS/Android device: fishingclash.link/TwoBitDaVinci Use my gift code FISHWITHRICKY to get a special $20 value reward!
@@BaliFoodTreePlanter the idea of heating up a metal to make it brighter than the sunshine that falls upon the earth is an interesting concept... The solar cells required to withstand all that heat will be a trick not so easy to preform. Natural gas is constantly being made wherever death has occurred and buried underground. If you don't burn it off as it is created. That natural gas ends up in the atmosphere. We have vast deposits of natural gas and much of stays underground but some does escape into the atmosphere. Natural gas burns clean and the Greens should have no problem with natural gas being used for heat and other energy requirements.
@@peacepoet1947 Where there are leaky NG reservoirs we should certainly extract and use the gas. But the natural gas we use comes from naturally sequestered natural gas. At this time our species should be working to postpone its use until we solve our immediate problem with too much atmospheric CO2. At this time it is therefore wrong headed to say "natural gas burns clean" since the CO2 combustion product is a problem best described as either pollution or "clean pollution". I just simply don't know where you are coming from. Right now, the most economical way to reduce CO2 emissions is to convert coal fired power plants into NG fired power plants, and only sometimes the investment math agrees.
Note how individual component efficiencies are touted but not the round trip. Some of these techs become a net NEGATIVE once daisy chained together as energy moves from mechanical to thermal to photo before it gets to electrical.
Also if you have a way to extract thermal energy more efficiently, it makes more sense to simply use these magical TPV cells to extract the thermal energy from a nuclear reactor. Whichever way you spin it, generating intermittent energy and then storing it is always going to be less efficient than just using a stable dispatchable power source like nuclear. Renewables should only be stored if you were going to charge that battery _anyway,_ such as for an electric car.
@@demoniack81 The standard way to use thermal energy is to just boil water; maybe it's more lossy but it's pretty much the cheapest material imaginable for the job.
@@demoniack81 Very close to my way of thinking. If TPV could extract electrical energy from heat that efficiently, then why not build a hybrid car using a much smaller engine which wastes most of its energy as heat anyway? Or house batteries charged from the central home heating appliance. Nuclear is a very viable option for grid-scale energy. Would TPV be more efficient than steam turbines? Would TPV make micro-nukes generators even smaller? How do TPVs compare to RTGs?
@@theTeslaFalcon I imagine that the reason the battery tech is being focused is because we already have good enough ways of generating energy, but not storing it, thus, there is waste. Lithium batteries are very good but expensive and probably have a low lifespan too; water resevoirs are huge and require certain conditions for elevation. Although, I imagine that these TPVs can be used in already existing generators to squeeze even more heat energy out of them.
This entire concept calls out to my engineer's heart! Indeed, all that molten metal slinging around multiple piping... yes indeed. Unfortunately, my long experience also warns me that such complexity around corrosive high pressure that leaks can be a severe problem. That doesn't mean you will have them; it just means that the precautions required to prevent leaks and issues of that type are excessive and expensive. This doesn't mean that they can't be built and systems like this can't work. It means that the alloys needed to create them are expensive and will require frequent maintenance and possible repair.
looks impressive, and they aren't just saying years down the road like most of these, they're saying this year. if it works as expected, and is scalable(even at smaller scale) it could change a lot of the way we think about heat.
Thinking differently is really the main part in the Finnish project he mention in the video where they do not convert the stored energy back to electricity, but use the heat directly and gain much better efficiency by doing so.
@@bknesheim This, all day. Conversion is wasteful, the more steps you add, the greater the losses. That ground storage system is SOOOO much less complicated and will probably work forever with little to no maintenance. This thing..meh. I see hazards, expense, and system failures written all over it.
@@enmiredbythelazy4401 Agreed, this is an old concept that worked and was simple to build when done properly with cheap, available materials. Home-made solar furnaces can give you lots of usable thermal energy using a transfer medium like oil or paraffin, and storage tanks, but require direct sunlight, so they're semi-useful, just like any solar collection, but cheap and easy. This is a search for more commercialization in a fantasy world of semi-tech.
Excellent discussion. However, the environmental impact of any new techs, in this case of tungsten arsenic and gallium extraction and disposal should also be considered.
Shhhhh, you will wake up Lil Ms Thumberg. Anyhew. we already have a very reliable technology that has something to do with Adams, which can power all those smuglies' homes and charge their $200,000 dollar electric luxury cars.
We need all of these ideas! This does look really complex though, really high temperatures and pretty exotic materials. I’m putting my money on the sand battery. Was particularly excited about the idea when I learned that pretty much any sand (even desert sand) will do!
Interesting. I love what new materials tech is coming up with. Unfortunately, there appears to be numerous potential points of failure. The entire solution may be too complex. Simplicity is the soul of efficiency.
I always liked an advertisement from years ago that said “in technology, simplification is the greatest sophistication”, another version says “KISS”, “Keep it simple, stupid”
" Simplicity is the soul of efficiency." Try telling that to God, or whoever tries to replicate a human eyeball. I like this quote better, just saying 😏: "Even the 'simplest' living cell is infinitely more complicated than your entire childhood" ~Albert Einstein
@@Rick-the-Swift Human eyes are not particularly efficient though, and animals like falcons with far superior vision do not have more complicated eyes.
@@Sgtassburgler Falcons and humans have very different eyes for very different reasons, while both are extremely efficient for their own specific purposes. Falcons are very farsighted and able to judge great distances, which is very efficient for hunting from the sky. Human eyes on the other hand are both near and far sighted, but specifically it's our near sightedness that allows us to manipulate small objects very close to our face. Hence human eyes are extremely efficient for inventing/crafting things and reading books etc. Perhaps you are just sore because you need to wear glasses?
A slight clarification, the Shockley-Queisser limit describes the maximum efficiency under solar illumination, AM 1.5, which is approximately a 6000 C black body radiation source. These cells would be operating under black-body light from the tungsten at ~2500 C, so the efficiency calculation is different.
Yes, I wonder how the limit changes as your light source changes, I'd suspect high energy blue light is easier to convert then reder light. Even sunlight at the Earths surface has been substantially altered from a true blackbody specturm due to absorbtion and reflection in the atmosphere, the visible part of the spectrum suffers the least loss and is the peak output and what our solar panels mostly harvest. So a true 6k black body spectrum such as in orbit is likely to be less efficient because the extra light your getting is in unusable parts of the spectrum, and thus your actual energy output remains the same even as the total input grows.
The theoretical max efficiency is not really important, what matters is the real system efficiency. If you get 50% out compared to what you put in that is the number that you work with.
01:24 This is literally what comes up when you google “steam turbine efficiency”: Multistage (moderate to high pressure ratio) steam turbines have thermodynamic efficiencies that vary from 65 percent for very small (under 1,000 kW) units to over 90 percent for large industrial and utility sized units. Small, single stage steam turbines can have efficiencies as low as 40 percent.
I'm finding many of these channels feel like they are devolving. Slowly slipping further into propaganda over science. At least 2 bit calls out many of the problems, this tech still has to overcome. Rather than just saying it is all good and our savior.
I haven't even 'Searched' (Other search engines are available), but most objections to Heat Pumps Vs Gas/Oil boilers, quote the incredibly low efficiency of electricity production from heat (fossil fuels), usually stating around 40%. I have never read anything about steam turbines at 90%. Perhaps your figures are theoretical, as opposed to what actually happens when you burn oil/gas to produce electricity.
@@joelrampersad1359 deteriorating is the real word, the fake term; "devolving" is only used by fopls who can not sense how this negates the nature of evolution meaning: "adaptation to an ever changing environment," meaning your fake term(devolving) is still just evolving, only in a direction that your emotions cause you to dislike. Only mouth-breathers(like the orator in this video) are stupid enough to use fake terms like "devolving."
To be able to reuse existing infrastructure is an exciting aspect. The advancements I'm "getting" to see as a 60 year old man feels like complete science fiction. I grew up on Arthur C. Clarke and his era of writers, who all envisioned such sophisticated technologies, tho they really had no idea... Amazing.
Technology is technology, there is no such thing as "technologies" as that is a redundant conjunction when sane peopel already refer to the sum of all technology as just technology. Mouth-breathers are stupid, this isnwhy they force redundant conjugation and warp linguistic integrity as their habits sway the evolution of English.
Ha ha ha I'm close to 60 yo but I'm not as old as you are if you think these breakthroughs are science fiction. Huhuhu 😅 you should read about science more, humans have been doing amazing things for centuries.😍👍I'm glad we can all come together and solve this alternative energy grid problem 💕❣️ These solar panels are what I've been waiting for since the 70s!
@@extraincomesuz Well, I am fairly abreast of current tech trends and breaking ground. I was being more general in my sense of awe. There are many new areas being investigated that I'm very excited about.
The argon sealing issues going to make this a maintenance nightmare and money pit. Argon must be harvested by cryogenic air separation by means of fractional distillation. Similar to a oil refinery but cooling to liquefy the gas as a means to seperate from one another.
@@jackm3040 tbh, if they’re using it to keep materials from reacting, then they can use alternative methods of protecting the tin from oxidizing, seems odd to me they would rather fill a building with argon rather than using a submersible unit or a closed system
@@ProfessionalGasLighting Yeah, imagine the process required to get into that building to conduct maintenance, or the the process of swapping out a TPM for that matter.
If these things can absorb heat and turn it into power, all you've gotta do is stick'm to my walls. I assure you that could power half the US. I live in a top level corner appartment and temperatures easily rise over 50c, at nighttime, because of all the heat released by my walls all night long. Imagine how much heat is trapped inside of them...
Burn baby burn burn baby burn your not aloud to cool down heat it up all night ya just heat it up all night long. Turn up the heat no time to cool off we must be as hot as the sun. Now burn up and kill all the trees to heat up all night long before your time comes.
lol, I had a top floor apartment once (I live in Alabama) where you couldn't hold your hand on the ceiling it was so hot. Our air conditioning bill was a nightmare. They built the stupid thing with black asphalt shingles and no attic ventilation at all, not even passive air vents on the side. The roof was an actual solar oven. It was awful.
Thank you for looking into this tech. This tech would work with the NuScale nuclear reactor. Storing in off-peak hours would be great for the efficiency of the plant.
First of all one key point is not discussed:- How we harness the solar energy to heat the source at first? After that from a broader perspective if you say that Central Solar Tower technology has failed in it's functioning because of the implementation, how come this so complicated thing won't fail. There are so many loopholes that need to be addressed in this technique.
Good Hod , what an idiotic filter/warning put up just to make a comment. Anyway, I still haven’t figured out how they are going to heat it up that much. What’s the heat source? The rest is interesting enough but I missed that part.
Yes, I'm excited about the prospects for this - just like I've been excited since the 1960s to own my first flying car. Flying cars do exist, but are they practical and affordable? Micro nuclear powerplants sound more feasible to me than TPV.
One must not confuse jig-a-watts -- which is a unit of power that in another universe from ours, has time-travel effects -- with the ability to store and release gigawatt-hours, which is a useful amount of energy at the city-scale IRL given current amounts of energy consumption/waste. Speaking of waste -- another source of actual gigawatt-hours is cutting consumption by not (wasting time making stupid jokes about fake universes ---just excuse me I'm having a crabby moment :
Sodium is fantastic on paper, but I believe to apply it, it requires a ton of water, which unfortunately is a resource that's becoming more and more limited, especially in places that would most benefit from solar energy. There's always catch22.
I think the correct direction for energy technology is towards energy independence, meaning every home should produce and store it's own energy. This tech does not seem well suited to this direction. But it does seem very interesting for something like a communal moon base.
I agree with you. Decentralize energy and food systems to a hyper-local source, in the home, and hope the transition away from globalized supply chains takes hold without crazy civil resistance and upheaval.
I actually think a little less decentralization is advantageous. Yes, ideally, in a vacuum, what you said would be the norm. But, in terms of privacy, if you plan to sell excess energy back to some utility for those who do not invest in such tech, thereby breaking even on the longest term maintenance and replacement fees (sustainable), then having a neighborhood entity act on your behalf is an advantage. The utility could see Neighborhood 1's energy production for the grid, but not the individual members of the co-op/corporation. In this way, it is private how much energy each household uses, creates, or sells back to the grid. If run as a non-profit, this masking effect is absolute. If it returns profits to shareholders (the neighborhood's residents), they do so with their own payout structure, and until a transfer of money is required, it remains private (you could credit their account with kilowatt hours until they wished a full or partial withdraw of its agreed to value).
I think you & many commenters are missing the point that this does unusual feat of enabling genuinely long term high power energy storage, whilst having potentially relative high efficiency (possibly over 50% which is high for such a long term storage; relative to others that offer say a few-many months of storage). It also seems quite modular & relatively compact ; compared to say pumped hydro. All this whilst still offering long term season to season storage. Also on offer is the ability to reduce & significantly boosts its output power levels. Obviously a few testbed commercial plants need building, to assess its true usefulness. Seemingly we should be trying to establish as manyfold methods of energy storage & generation, as possible; before a good mix will emerge.
Communal systems are usually more efficient and cost effective, like having a laundry room in the building versus having individual machines on each kitchen. Heat storage is more efficient the bigger the storage element is, as heat is lost based on surface, but capacity depends on volume, which scales faster. That's the same reason why giant insects wouldn't "work" in real life.
"Gallium arsenide can absorb relatively more incident radiation because of the relatively higher absorption coefficient" is a tautology, like saying "it's more efficient because it has greater efficiency", or "it can absorb more because it's more absorbent."
100 Joules of heat gives 35 Joules of electricity by spinning a turbine. Or 40 joules by TPV. Who wouldn't do this ? The storage breakthrough is also amazing.
Amazing the amount of information that you must go through in a month. I'm glad that there is someone like you that can sift through this information and find some of the important kernels and then put it out in a more understandable fashion for some of us. Thank you Ricky.
I saw this from a article early this year and I could see this being used in space to use waste heat to make electricity as well to cool certain components down or other things.
Also, carbon heat storage could be compared to the lava field near Hilo Hawaii. Some of the lava deposited there in the early 50's still hasn't fully cooled.
Looks interesting for sure! Of course it all hinges on the 'what ifs' that will only be identified/addressed when a prototype is up and running. Will be interesting to see what the durability will be. Hey... another piece of the puzzle potentially.
Thank you for putting out this information. I am studying the PV/Thermal field and you provide a lot of good information for research projects and reports for class.
Seems like good science but the safety aspects of such a system will add complexity. The first thing that jumps out at me is the water cooling will need to be comprised of three independent systems running simultaneously, each of which must be capable of handling 100% of the cooling. It will be interesting to see the prototype in operation.
Very enjoyable video. One bad number. Your efficiency for turbines refers to gas turbines, which are inefficient, but were commonly used for peak power consumption times. Steam turbines, combined with the reheat piping in a standard boiler produce efficiencies in the 90's. A gas fired or coal fired power plant has an overall efficiency in the low 70's (burner efficiency x turbine efficiency x generator efficiency).
To be effective this system needs to really be collecting sunlight directly as a thermal energy via highly concentrated sunlight. Then your not going from 20-30% efficient solar to a crude resistence heater then back to electricity at 50% to get a total efficiency of 10-15%. With direct solar heat capture your looking at close to 100% initial sunlight capture and then 50% conversion and 50% final output from the same area of solar farm.
Your losing 60% to 70% at night when the sun is down. This could run 24/7 as long as temperatures can be maintained. My concern is cost, which system is a 50 year average roi.
I used to use a solar calculator at night using the house lighting you have in most houses. And I mean as a calculator not a bookmark. Never noticed any errors. I do remember thinking why couldn't you have a box with a bulb inside to generate more. Then I went back to reading my book.
The main problem with molten tin is that if something goes wrong, and the heat drops below the melting point, all of the tin solidifies. So the system cannot ever be allowed to cool down.
Yeah, we where running calculators with pv cells off of indoor lighting back in the 80s-90s too. Replacing the old 60 watt light bulb with a giagantic friggin light bulb doesn't really make the idea any better. It just turns downright stupid when you're needing to liquid cool the thing to boot.
Tin melts at 231.9 C - a temperature that is easily attained. You could send heated argon down the pipes to melt out the tin if needed. However, you only need to keep the graphite heated above the melt point to prevent solidification. If you have a loss of heating, then you drain the system when the tin is down to say 500C and restart it later after bringing the system back up to a high enough temperature for the tin to circulate. You could embed electric heating elements near the tin circulation piping to act as an in place restart system. It would also be useful for allowing you to take the system offline for maintenance without having to drain the system; i.e for replacing tpv elements or tungsten emitters.
We have many liquid metal systems, it is a problem our species has many solutions for. Most systems use electric heaters similar to a kiln at both startup & shutdown; but liquid steel for one example is usually kept liquid with coal, the same fuel usually used to melt it in the first place. So basically you usually pick an off the shelf solution that best fits your application.
One cool way they store energy today is when there's excess being produced, they pump water into dams. Then when demand increases they can generate with hydro electric. Another storage is giant fly wheels. Energy spins them faster and faster to store, and reverse to extract the energy.
I'm wondering if large LTD stirling engines have a place in this process. I think NASA had made one that had vertually no friction but it was not LTD. It was used buy the military in Humvees exhaust gas to run things like water purifiers etc.
Experience to date shows that in general materials at extreme temperatures are unstable and therefore system components degrade too quickly. When a number of challenges to success with materials operating under extreme stress exists, the probability of success decreases accordingly. IMO that is the long and short of it. Good luck with the development of this thermophotovoltaic system or whatever system may flow out of it.
This technology will be available to the public in 2082, maybe a little earlier. We all know how this works, for the past two decades I've seen a jaw-dropping breakthrough in technology, but the day you heard about it will be the last day you may ever hear about it.
Vinci just to clarify at 11 minutes you stat that a one meter square cell could produce 100 kilowatts. Is that from the tungsten foil glow? I thought it only produced about double the light energy of the sun. The sun produces over one kilowat per square meter and 50% would be about 500 watts per square meter out in the sun. Even that would be great because it would allow electric cars to run around town on 6 or so meters of solar on the roof and hood and trunk without depleting the battery and sit in the sun and recharge for highway use.
Yeah, but how far would you get when you tie your new mattress on your car and happen to cover/shade all those energy cells!!!??? Lol🤣🤣 From a 70 year old great grandma who had to be tutored by her teacher to barely pass algebra! I am AMAZED by all the scientific minds commenting on these sites! KUDOS!!👍🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼👵🏻💞
Thanks for this introduction to TPV. Eventually a viable technology will be developed that we can actually use to capture the abundant energy that hits the earth for routine use. Keep us informed!
As always. Could, Might, Possible, etc.. Let's hope for some real breakthroughs. How much energy is used to heat the tin to become a liquid, as that is part of the efficiency equation in reality. Where does that energy come from and what is the efficiency of producing that energy. it's complicated.
I think part of the idea is to use solar or wind energy to get something like tin hot then use that as the energy source when there's no wind or sunlight 🤔
@@ninjaxorgmail Not realistic. If you have no solar for several days and no wind either (Reality at times) then the tin never gets hot or useful. None of these alternatives are the answer yet. Too many technology combinations that try to cover all the bases is too expensive and there are no guarantees and so far, efficiency is pretty low, expensive and requires too many compromises that are not healthy for the earth or people. What's really strange that when observing the factual data history of the earths temperature, we are below the mean and optimal is a bit warmer than we are now. They never mention what is optimal for planet health.
Cell efficiency sure has gone up from what we worked with in the 80s. We were getting around 18% while being under a lense which was equal to 15 suns(best I can remember).
There's just one glarring question: How do they heat it up so much without using more energy than they put out? This just sounds like more pie in the sky! Especially with climate change!!
True it cost more more to put in than they get out. But its made to use up unstored (wasted energy) without using up valuable light weight lithium Think hydro dam after a storm. About to be dumped Convert movement into electricity - use electricity to make heat- Store heat not electricity- then convert to electricity when needed. More or less
Love that last idea of possibly putting thermal batteries co-located near other industries that have a significant heat by-product and be able to harness what is currently 'waste'.
Well it's a bit more nuanced then that. Heat is a form of energy and thermodynamicly a 'measurement' of the average movement of atoms. Heat transfer can occur through the processies of condution, convetion or radiation (aka light).
You are incorrect: both are electromagnetic radiation, but of different frequencies. When light strikes a surface it can be absorbed and re-emitted at a different frequency.
@@michaeldeleted Wrong. Everything is in waves, but it is not "light" in itself. Light specifically is excited by photons in a certain range of frequencies. That being said, waves and particles being moved as such is described as light. However, heat isn't electromagnetic. It's kinetic energy. "When light strikes a surface it can be absorbed and re-emitted at a different frequency." - Except heat itself doesn't entirely behave that way, therefore it is not the same as light and couldn't be comparable.
@@AAFREAK I'm sorry if my one sentence post that was a slight oversimplification offended y'all, but I assure I know how this works. I was referring to the heat energy emitted from an object that you can feel as heat, or see with an infrared camera. That IS infrared radiation and it IS light. That is also the very thing the video was about.
50% efficiency is pretty good, about double that of a gasoline engine. So that raises an interesting question. Suppose you made a rectangular prism with dimensions around 60x45x45 cm with the four internal large faces covered in this thermophotovoltaic material and backed with a cooling system. That gives you about 1 square meter which should be good for around 100kW, according to the video. Down the center of the cavity you run a tungsten tube into which you inject burning fuel (gasoline, diesel, maybe hydrogen, etc.) to heat the tube to the target temperature (maybe pre-heating the fuel-air mix by using it in a secondary coolant loop). That would give you a lightweight, compact, clean, quiet, no-moving-parts gasoline-powered electric generator with output power about the same as the gasoline engine in a Toyota Prius, but with around double the efficiency (and probably even better emissions). Add a relatively small lithium battery to provide energy storage and a somewhat larger electric drive motor and you've got a hybrid that might approach 100 MPG with dramatically reduced mechanical complexity.
This tech seems rather unplausible and is still very far away from any commercial adoption - according to the scientists' own roadmap, it's not even clear if basic reliability criteria can be met or such TPV cells can be mass produced. At this point, slapping peltier elements with heatsinks + some fans onto all kinds of processes that create waste heat in order to turn the thermal gradient back into electrical energy seems more viable. Heck, they could even increase the conversion efficiency of steam turbies.
Very Interesting. A Better application might be to use this "Solar cell" for the power conversion system of a Molten Salt Reactor (MSR). MSRs are advanced (gen IV) nuclear reactors that promise greater fuel burnup and can run on Thorium or Uranium, and some are looking to consume Spent Nuclear Fuel. What is interesting as that MSRs can typically generate higher temperatures, about 1200F. If 50% efficient thermal to electrical conversion can be achieved at this temperature, this cell might be a better solution than a steam turbine or even a closed Brayton cycle power conversion system which is theoretically capable of 50% efficiency, but I don't believe any have been built at scale.
100 kW / m^2? Holy cow, that's a lot of radiation. 100 times brighter than the sun - is that real? I guess it's all in the infrared, but still, that's insane.
This technology sounds like it would be a LOT more useful for making a) hybrid cars powered by natural gas and b) natural gas fired power plants more efficient. Back in the 1990's I knew some guys in Issaquah, WA, called Krystal Corp I believe, who were making a desktop sized generator that used some triple junction cells around a stack of ceramic disks with a natural gas flame heating them white hot, with mirrors in a star pattern focusing the emitted photons to vertical rows of triple junction cells. They were getting 36.5% efficiency back then, in the 1995 period.
That looks like a Rube Goldberg contraption, which according to my experience will become quite expensive, because it has so many points of failure. Why not ditch the storage part, and just put them /beneath/ any given conventional rooftop photovoltaics rack, so that they can collect the heat portion of the sunlight, and make a double use of the solar energy, even at a high latitude? Actually, I am living in a house with rooms right beneath the tiles; and the temperature in my room never went below 25 degrees Celsius (that is 77° Fahrenheit) for three months straight, even at night. I would have loved to remove that heat and make better use of it, instead of seeing it go to waste, or even worse, consume precious energy because of an air conditioner running 24/7.
*41% converted to electric power? NOT BLOODY LIKELY!* At 10:37 "tungsten filament at 2400 degrees C" (2673 K), that Tungsten (or any other blackbody emitter) will radiate over 2.8 _megawatts_ per square meter. With TPV output of 0.1 megawatts per square meter, the implied efficiency of TPV is a mere 3.5 percent! Plus it is extremely difficult to get concentrated sunlight to deliver such a high temperature, because whatever you use to absorb the light will re-radiate megawatts per square meter, and lose even more by convection of air on the exposed surface. All other heat sources are FAR cooler than what sunlight can theoretically deliver (5800 K), except for primary combustion. Sure, they might use this TPV thing to convert combustion heat, but at an utterly lousy 3.5% efficiency? No, no, no!!! And then that TPV requires aggressive cooling, which means a low temperature of the waste heat from cooling it. No way to regain efficiency there! The math for 2000 °C is even crazier. The video explanation given just totally fails to work.
Their efficiency number, I suspect, is the efficiency of the cell itself - not factoring in all the losses in the whole system. The whole thing sounds fantastical. The mirror at the bottom of that box makes no sense - clearly just reflects most of the light in a different direction away from the cell. And we scale the whole thing by just putting in a thousand of the cubes? Completely ignoring the cooling requirements explained a moment earlier. The whole thing sounds laughable. This is with absolute certainty another scam - making fantastical claims and presenting a bunch of wildly misleading numbers. And we never hear the guy on this channel disclaim if he was paid by the company. I find this channel not trustworthy at all. I don't know if that's because the guy is taking bribes or if he's really that naive. Either way, I'm finally blocking this channel, which I should have done 5 videos ago. It's all like this. I'm done giving this channel my time and the benefit of the doubt. 👎
Indeed, this project is completely unworkable, horribly complex and links multiple technologies requiring containment. Non-starter. No investor would spend $10 on this
it reminds me a little bit of a nuclear power plant, where you have movable steering rods. uk, also had an experimental reactor (think it was in the 1950s to 80s..) where they used graphite blocks with inner tubing to transfer heat with some fluid mix into water -> turbines ->electricity. thank you for your video about this new thermophotovoltaic cell! very interesting technology. with a tungsten "bulb" and a phototherm "feedback" reflector. genial.
It is less complicated related to legacy coal/steam power station. Probably cheaper too. But compared to a solar panel + battery combo? Something is off in their calculation. First, you get energy from some source that generates high temp, high enough to melt the metal. You already lost some of energy there. Then you transport the liquid metal through the carbon "battery". You lost some of energy again. Then when you actually want the electricity, you transfer the heat to tungsten plate (you lose some of energy there) which will transfer the energy to TPV cells, that are now at 41% efficiency and could be in theory up to a 50%. You are also cooling down those cells and heat is lost in the heating the water. How much of energy have been lost from the initial source (back where we were melting the metal) to the moment the electricity is flowing to a grid? It simply does not add up. Now, for sure, we HAVE to find a way to use all the heat that is wasted all around the industry. Multilayered cells seems like a great thing. And infra based cells are good.
I wanted to ask a question but I didn't want to seem stupid. Admittedly I know next to nothing about this. But my first thought was, don't you need energy to create the heat? I'm glad to see you have similar questions.
Thank you, great video as always. Might I suggest using a deesser or some other audio enhancement to deal with the “mouth noices”. Amazing video thou, thank you 🥇🙏
3M in the 70s did something similar . they used a thermocouple to charge batteries from winding it around an exhaust manifold on a train which gave good charge to the batteries. i tried to find out what the thermocouple was made of but could not find out as it was hush hush and i was an appie. i worked for saa at the time but the experiment was done at sar.
This is first new tech that sort of gets me excited. It seems to me that this system can reside in cities close to where people need it without worrying about killing ourselves or burning down our homes. All joking aside please keep up updated on the pilot testing of this tech.
The back mirror is a great idea, I told someone years ago, that it would take decades before we see improved solar cells. I was wrong. Hope they hit scale production sooner rather than later.
This sounds great - as a generator for a traditional heat source. If you use it for fluctuating energy like solar or wind, you would still suffer unnecessary losses.
The heat shielding on spacecraft is called ablative shielding. It's designed to shed itself, and take thermal energy away with the pieces. In a sense, designed to fail in a controlled manner, like a fuse.
I used to measure a DC voltage being produced across the terminals of a disconnected, Ohmite resistor. I would first run a high current through the Ohmite resistor. Next, I would disconnect the Ohmite resistor. As the resistor cools, it produces a measurable DC voltage across its two terminals.
This is similar to a gas +PV attachment I had proposed and tinkered with in the 90's. I had found that a brand of highly efficient gas heaters burned a bright yellow that would charge a photocell from half to full capacity. The problem I ran into was soot (microparticles) in and leaking from the combustion chamber. It builds up too fast on the photocell and any glass divider in the chamber. I only got one week (8 days) of full capacity, and a sharp decline to 30%! Soot attracts soot. And yes, a filter for the intake was already part of the system.
Folks ought to check out LUMELOID and QUENSOR, they are both built on thin film conductive polymers and both were patented by Alvin Marks. LUMELOID can be thought of as an array of polarizing nanoscale antennas tuned to absorb electromagnetic waves in the UV, visible and IR at about 96% efficiency. QUENSOR uses fluorine to create carbon/fluorine capacitors along a stretch oriented array of conductive, each capacitor as I recall used 4 atoms
Sounds super expensive and not economically viable. I do like the idea of fixing the concentrated solar array, due to the fact that heat is the most abundant source of free energy. Our sun provides all the energy we need, and systems that harness heat and expend the heat are ideal. We spend so much on cooling our homes in hot areas, but all we do is dump the heat right outside our homes. If we could only use that heat instead of wasting it. We would be set. Unfortunately it's insanely expensive to implement discoveries like tpv.
Renewable energy science, and material science too, is so exciting in the modern era and I fell we are about to be in the golden age of the sciences. I wish I had decided to study this instead of computer science. I feel we are on the verge of some incredible discoveries within the next couple of decades or less
A wave's kinetic energy can easily be converted into potential energy by raising a mass with each wave that passes. This potential energy can be converted into electricity by coupling the mass to a generator and lowering it when desired. If the distance to the customer is too large to transport electricity via power lines, converting the wave's kinetic energy to potential energy first is wasteful. It can still be used locally to desalinate seawater (to name but a hot topic) or generate hydrogen and then be shipped out. The advantages are that this can be scaled up more than most land based energy storage devices, the price of ocean being low compared to the price of land and the many more regulations a land based design must adhere to. The disadvantage is distance to customer. Fortunately, most of us live near the coast.
As you mentioned, the heat energy storage module using is really a separate technology from the TPV heat to electricity module. If the TPV module is really that efficient (and cheaper), it could potentially replace steam turbines *whereever* they are used to generate electricity, not just in renewable energy storage. This might include natural gas power plants, coal power plants, nuclear power plants, and as you mentioned, concentracted solar power plants. I imagine a solid state power generator would be so much more reliable and long lasting than a steam turbine, which has moving parts that wear out.
I wonder how much power it could gain back from cooled devices... I mean, seriously, think about it. We have CPU's in our PC and phones and such things, right? Those have cooling blocks on them with thermal paste to quickly transfer the heat away from it as these things go 100+ degrees within about 1.5 seconds. What if we turned the cooling blocks into a TPV module? How efficient would it be at turning that heat back into energy? Even if this could only catch 20% of the actual heat back into energy, we'd be saving 20% of energy on an industry which right now uses about 20% of all of our energy. It's probably not realistic, but a man can dream.
Omg! YES Finally a better way then steam 😆. Q1): can we order a 1-3sided tpv Q2): Could it be run next to a candle to maybe recharge a AAA or AA battery. Q3): (if im donated one to my to test with my long burning candles 24-75days worth) could I direct order more at a much more reasonable cost say $25/TPV? Oooooo the possibilities!!! Thank you for the video and the info, great work mah dude, keep it up! 😁😊
Interesting technology. Tungsten is used in the standard light bulb (Edison’s invention). Tungsten light bulbs typically don’t have a long life. Is that due to heat cycle degradation of turning the light on and off? Perhaps they are using a tungsten compound that gives it a longer life? Hopefully, they will have success. However, relying on excess green energy for this process may prove difficult as electrical energy demands are increasing, especially with the thinking that all coal, oil, and gas electrical plants can be eliminated and we can’t use nuclear because politicians have been lobbied to believe that it is dangerous.
I use sunshine to make electricity, but not initially. I use Sunshine for what it is, namely, heat. I concentrate that heat and make steam, then run that against a homemade turbine and transmission, which is coupled to a generator, alternator actually, and I make my own electricity that way. All the stuff you talk about is very interesting, but in my opinion, very impractical. I say we use the heat of the Sun as it is and not try to manipulate it into all these other exotic things, which have their own set of problems to be overcome. Just keep it simple.
Turbines efficiencies are based on the mechanical energy obtained using the carnot cycle. The efficiency scales with the ratio of the hot zone and cold zone, thus if you had a 2500K Hot zone the Turbine would a far more efficient solution than the usual.
Renewables also need several hundred times the land area of a nuclear plant. Example is Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Any area of 500ac produces the amount of power that would require 78 square miles for renewables to produce.
there is the concept of a 'hot mirror' , which is a material which reflects wavelenghts of infrared which contribute most to heat, and lets shorter wavelengths of light pass through I'm surprised that it doesn't get a mention here, such a material would only let short enough wavelengths of light through to the photoelectric cell, while reflecting longer wavelength infrared back to the tungsten to preserve its thermal energy
This method of energy storage seems overly complicated and requires huge resources. Fossil fuels still are the most practical way to provide the energy we need.
It would really come into play for fission plants in areas where water for steam and cooling for a pressure gradient for a turbine to work isn't available, like future Luna and Mars colonies, or even desert cities where fresh water is better used for other things, like indoor farming (most efficient use of water for food production) and water for resident's personal use. Even in building new fission and eventually fusion plants, the turbine building can be replaced with these to really cut down on maintenance costs.
I am new to your channel, and I am finding your presentations very informative and easily consumable. Thank you for the hard work and excellent research.
I liked how I was able to follow you along without confusion. I seen the previous videos discussed in this presentation and I have a good imagination. I live in Alaska with solar panels and a windmill and a 80 gallon gas hot water heater tank as a heat battery that doesn't do anything but hold heat and heat my room from that which was stored making the sand heat battery solution appealing to me. Magnet engines. To get GPT 4 to engineer and test within a deep learning system and then 3D print the device to put the magnets into doesn't sound far-fetched to me, harnessing magnetics to generate electricity. Imagine a 5000 watt magnet generator in every automobile that plugs into the wall when not in use producing power for the grid. That's the product that will save the future that I want to create. And then you've seen a motor that spins a flywheel that spins a generator that keeps everything going Plus useful power. Oh you can't do that but some magic of magnetics, capacitors, flywheels and gear ratios gives me an optimistic viewpoint of the possibilities. I have seen handmade little ones that produce no useful power but they spin on their own and a real engine of sort powered purely by magnets in a Korean version has a place on the factory floor. Why aren't these machines flying out of a factory? Several different kinds are shown on TH-cam. Any thoughts on how to get started and getting into production without being sued by The Honorable Senator Mnuchin?
Fascinating! Could this system be used as a way to extract energy from "hot" nuclear "waste" (the "spent" fuel rods that otherwise have to be kept in cooling pools)?
FYI the conversion ratio for when americans say "can power tens of thousands of homes" is currently about 2.84. So the energy required for 10.000 US homes would power 28.400 EU homes on average. (or 61.800 Finnish homes). Though that will probably change as the EU moves away from gas heating, and we install more air conditioning further up north, since even now few governments seem to take climate change seriously and the effects are becoming very noticable.
Pretty funny, one of the cheapest ways to generate electricity, but also one of the most expensive. There aren’t many ways to generate electricity really, after all, wind and hydroelectric are both solar in actuality. Tho it can be dangerous, nuclear is still the cheapest way by far and doesn’t require all the rare minerals from other countries, and doesn’t cover the landscape with panels or giant windmills. That being said, super interesting video.
Start playing Fishing Clash for free on your iOS/Android device: fishingclash.link/TwoBitDaVinci
Use my gift code FISHWITHRICKY to get a special $20 value reward!
Sit upright and learn how to use your nose alone for breathing.
Very bad & destructive DESIGN to Earth & humans though may be headed in good direction if corrected. I consult on this.
@@BaliFoodTreePlanter the idea of heating up a metal to make it brighter than the sunshine that falls upon the earth is an interesting concept... The solar cells required to withstand all that heat will be a trick not so easy to preform. Natural gas is constantly being made wherever death has occurred and buried underground. If you don't burn it off as it is created. That natural gas ends up in the atmosphere. We have vast deposits of natural gas and much of stays underground but some does escape into the atmosphere. Natural gas burns clean and the Greens should have no problem with natural gas being used for heat and other energy requirements.
@@peacepoet1947 Where there are leaky NG reservoirs we should certainly extract and use the gas. But the natural gas we use comes from naturally sequestered natural gas. At this time our species should be working to postpone its use until we solve our immediate problem with too much atmospheric CO2. At this time it is therefore wrong headed to say "natural gas burns clean" since the CO2 combustion product is a problem best described as either pollution or "clean pollution". I just simply don't know where you are coming from. Right now, the most economical way to reduce CO2 emissions is to convert coal fired power plants into NG fired power plants, and only sometimes the investment math agrees.
@@tsamuel6224 I totally disagree with the Co2 theory that it is a cause of global warming.
Note how individual component efficiencies are touted but not the round trip. Some of these techs become a net NEGATIVE once daisy chained together as energy moves from mechanical to thermal to photo before it gets to electrical.
It's just another type of battery in the end.
Also if you have a way to extract thermal energy more efficiently, it makes more sense to simply use these magical TPV cells to extract the thermal energy from a nuclear reactor. Whichever way you spin it, generating intermittent energy and then storing it is always going to be less efficient than just using a stable dispatchable power source like nuclear.
Renewables should only be stored if you were going to charge that battery _anyway,_ such as for an electric car.
@@demoniack81 The standard way to use thermal energy is to just boil water; maybe it's more lossy but it's pretty much the cheapest material imaginable for the job.
@@demoniack81
Very close to my way of thinking. If TPV could extract electrical energy from heat that efficiently, then why not build a hybrid car using a much smaller engine which wastes most of its energy as heat anyway?
Or house batteries charged from the central home heating appliance.
Nuclear is a very viable option for grid-scale energy. Would TPV be more efficient than steam turbines? Would TPV make micro-nukes generators even smaller? How do TPVs compare to RTGs?
@@theTeslaFalcon I imagine that the reason the battery tech is being focused is because we already have good enough ways of generating energy, but not storing it, thus, there is waste.
Lithium batteries are very good but expensive and probably have a low lifespan too; water resevoirs are huge and require certain conditions for elevation.
Although, I imagine that these TPVs can be used in already existing generators to squeeze even more heat energy out of them.
This entire concept calls out to my engineer's heart! Indeed, all that molten metal slinging around multiple piping... yes indeed. Unfortunately, my long experience also warns me that such complexity around corrosive high pressure that leaks can be a severe problem. That doesn't mean you will have them; it just means that the precautions required to prevent leaks and issues of that type are excessive and expensive.
This doesn't mean that they can't be built and systems like this can't work. It means that the alloys needed to create them are expensive and will require frequent maintenance and possible repair.
lava in a bottle?
looks impressive, and they aren't just saying years down the road like most of these, they're saying this year. if it works as expected, and is scalable(even at smaller scale) it could change a lot of the way we think about heat.
Thinking differently is really the main part in the Finnish project he mention in the video where they do not convert the stored energy back to electricity, but use the heat directly and gain much better efficiency by doing so.
@@bknesheim This, all day. Conversion is wasteful, the more steps you add, the greater the losses. That ground storage system is SOOOO much less complicated and will probably work forever with little to no maintenance. This thing..meh. I see hazards, expense, and system failures written all over it.
@@enmiredbythelazy4401 Agreed, this is an old concept that worked and was simple to build when done properly with cheap, available materials. Home-made solar furnaces can give you lots of usable thermal energy using a transfer medium like oil or paraffin, and storage tanks, but require direct sunlight, so they're semi-useful, just like any solar collection, but cheap and easy. This is a search for more commercialization in a fantasy world of semi-tech.
Excellent discussion. However, the environmental impact of any new techs, in this case of tungsten arsenic and gallium extraction and disposal should also be considered.
Shhhhh, you will wake up Lil Ms Thumberg. Anyhew. we already have a very reliable technology that has something to do with Adams, which can power all those smuglies' homes and charge their $200,000 dollar electric luxury cars.
@@citylockapolytechnikeyllcc7936 a 1 meter square making 100 kW of electricity? Thunberg would be ecstatic.
@@citylockapolytechnikeyllcc7936 go back to russia, troll
Yup and the damage to wildlife and the ground that is covered up...
Sorry, I’m backed to where you have to seal an unspecified area building with argon…
We need all of these ideas! This does look really complex though, really high temperatures and pretty exotic materials. I’m putting my money on the sand battery. Was particularly excited about the idea when I learned that pretty much any sand (even desert sand) will do!
JustRELEASEtheFreeENERGYpatentsAsThis1sGhey...
The idea of creating a small but powerful space heater without a lot of tech sounds lovely if you live where it gets cold.
Interesting. I love what new materials tech is coming up with. Unfortunately, there appears to be numerous potential points of failure. The entire solution may be too complex. Simplicity is the soul of efficiency.
I always liked an advertisement from years ago that said “in technology, simplification is the greatest sophistication”, another version says “KISS”,
“Keep it simple, stupid”
"The best part is no part." - Elon Musk
" Simplicity is the soul of efficiency." Try telling that to God, or whoever tries to replicate a human eyeball.
I like this quote better, just saying 😏: "Even the 'simplest' living cell is infinitely more complicated than your entire childhood"
~Albert Einstein
@@Rick-the-Swift Human eyes are not particularly efficient though, and animals like falcons with far superior vision do not have more complicated eyes.
@@Sgtassburgler Falcons and humans have very different eyes for very different reasons, while both are extremely efficient for their own specific purposes. Falcons are very farsighted and able to judge great distances, which is very efficient for hunting from the sky. Human eyes on the other hand are both near and far sighted, but specifically it's our near sightedness that allows us to manipulate small objects very close to our face. Hence human eyes are extremely efficient for inventing/crafting things and reading books etc.
Perhaps you are just sore because you need to wear glasses?
A slight clarification, the Shockley-Queisser limit describes the maximum efficiency under solar illumination, AM 1.5, which is approximately a 6000 C black body radiation source. These cells would be operating under black-body light from the tungsten at ~2500 C, so the efficiency calculation is different.
Yes, I wonder how the limit changes as your light source changes, I'd suspect high energy blue light is easier to convert then reder light. Even sunlight at the Earths surface has been substantially altered from a true blackbody specturm due to absorbtion and reflection in the atmosphere, the visible part of the spectrum suffers the least loss and is the peak output and what our solar panels mostly harvest. So a true 6k black body spectrum such as in orbit is likely to be less efficient because the extra light your getting is in unusable parts of the spectrum, and thus your actual energy output remains the same even as the total input grows.
W Tung clan
Well said. You obviously know your material! 👍🏻
@@SunriseLAW
The world isn't ready for _that_ kind of discussions.
The theoretical max efficiency is not really important, what matters is the real system efficiency. If you get 50% out compared to what you put in that is the number that you work with.
01:24 This is literally what comes up when you google “steam turbine efficiency”:
Multistage (moderate to high pressure ratio) steam turbines have thermodynamic efficiencies that vary from 65 percent for very small (under 1,000 kW) units to over 90 percent for large industrial and utility sized units. Small, single stage steam turbines can have efficiencies as low as 40 percent.
Yeah I was thinking this was wrong as well, steam turbines can be very efficient
Yeah, this channel is slowly devolving into sci-fi.
I'm finding many of these channels feel like they are devolving. Slowly slipping further into propaganda over science. At least 2 bit calls out many of the problems, this tech still has to overcome. Rather than just saying it is all good and our savior.
I haven't even 'Searched' (Other search engines are available), but most objections to Heat Pumps Vs Gas/Oil boilers, quote the incredibly low efficiency of electricity production from heat (fossil fuels), usually stating around 40%. I have never read anything about steam turbines at 90%. Perhaps your figures are theoretical, as opposed to what actually happens when you burn oil/gas to produce electricity.
@@joelrampersad1359 deteriorating is the real word, the fake term; "devolving" is only used by fopls who can not sense how this negates the nature of evolution meaning: "adaptation to an ever changing environment," meaning your fake term(devolving) is still just evolving, only in a direction that your emotions cause you to dislike.
Only mouth-breathers(like the orator in this video) are stupid enough to use fake terms like "devolving."
I see a lot of potential for this tech if linked with cooling systems in nuclear plants or steel factories.
None of those usually generate high enough temperatures.
To be able to reuse existing infrastructure is an exciting aspect. The advancements I'm "getting" to see as a 60 year old man feels like complete science fiction. I grew up on Arthur C. Clarke and his era of writers, who all envisioned such sophisticated technologies, tho they really had no idea... Amazing.
This is science fiction.
Technology is technology, there is no such thing as "technologies" as that is a redundant conjunction when sane peopel already refer to the sum of all technology as just technology.
Mouth-breathers are stupid, this isnwhy they force redundant conjugation and warp linguistic integrity as their habits sway the evolution of English.
@@linyenchin6773 Here is a word. Petty. Ain't that a peach.
Ha ha ha I'm close to 60 yo but I'm not as old as you are if you think these breakthroughs are science fiction. Huhuhu 😅 you should read about science more, humans have been doing amazing things for centuries.😍👍I'm glad we can all come together and solve this alternative energy grid problem 💕❣️ These solar panels are what I've been waiting for since the 70s!
@@extraincomesuz Well, I am fairly abreast of current tech trends and breaking ground. I was being more general in my sense of awe. There are many new areas being investigated that I'm very excited about.
The argon sealing issues going to make this a maintenance nightmare and money pit. Argon must be harvested by cryogenic air separation by means of fractional distillation. Similar to a oil refinery but cooling to liquefy the gas as a means to seperate from one another.
Yeah but when there's government money for new stuff why not
@@mikefitzgerald5127 There's no such thing as "Government Money" it's Taxpayers money and shouldn't be squandered.
Omg omg 😳
@@jackm3040 tbh, if they’re using it to keep materials from reacting, then they can use alternative methods of protecting the tin from oxidizing, seems odd to me they would rather fill a building with argon rather than using a submersible unit or a closed system
@@ProfessionalGasLighting Yeah, imagine the process required to get into that building to conduct maintenance, or the the process of swapping out a TPM for that matter.
Amazing, lately, how so many things that have been around for several decades are "breakthrough!" I rank this right up there with "new and improved."
If these things can absorb heat and turn it into power, all you've gotta do is stick'm to my walls. I assure you that could power half the US. I live in a top level corner appartment and temperatures easily rise over 50c, at nighttime, because of all the heat released by my walls all night long. Imagine how much heat is trapped inside of them...
😂
😂
I wish on my walls too. A lot of heat of the sun directly 😄😄😄
Burn baby burn burn baby burn your not aloud to cool down heat it up all night ya just heat it up all night long.
Turn up the heat no time to cool off we must be as hot as the sun.
Now burn up and kill all the trees to heat up all night long before your time comes.
lol, I had a top floor apartment once (I live in Alabama) where you couldn't hold your hand on the ceiling it was so hot. Our air conditioning bill was a nightmare. They built the stupid thing with black asphalt shingles and no attic ventilation at all, not even passive air vents on the side. The roof was an actual solar oven. It was awful.
The cooling water for the TPV you can cool down using sterling engines. You could get more energy from the waste heat.
Or they could just invest into sterling decentralization tech. But capitalism doesn't want it
Thank you for looking into this tech. This tech would work with the NuScale nuclear reactor. Storing in off-peak hours would be great for the efficiency of the plant.
First of all one key point is not discussed:- How we harness the solar energy to heat the source at first?
After that from a broader perspective if you say that Central Solar Tower technology has failed in it's functioning because of the implementation, how come this so complicated thing won't fail. There are so many loopholes that need to be addressed in this technique.
Good Hod , what an idiotic filter/warning put up just to make a comment. Anyway, I still haven’t figured out how they are going to heat it up that much. What’s the heat source? The rest is interesting enough but I missed that part.
@@lukeherdaii9528 The same way they do it in the metal processing industry, electric arc furnaces.
Yes, I'm excited about the prospects for this - just like I've been excited since the 1960s to own my first flying car. Flying cars do exist, but are they practical and affordable? Micro nuclear powerplants sound more feasible to me than TPV.
Thorium
Thunderfoot enters the chat
people are unreasonably afraid of nuclear ppower
You are no two bit! You're very committed to a clean earth and knowledgeable on how to start making it happen at home! Thank you!
I think it would be amazing if they could build a facility that could generate and maintain 1.21 gigawatts! Just think of the implications, Marty!
The maintain part is key, it's easy to produce high power levels for fractions of a second. But we don't know how much total energy we need.
@Kenneth Ferland we would only need the 1.21 Gigawatts for a split second ti make the connection with the Flux Capacitor.
1, point, 21, gigawatts!!???? 😂
@@beratnabodhi What do you have this Flux Capacitor attached to? A Stainless steel shelled car with a very 80s style?
One must not confuse jig-a-watts -- which is a unit of power that in another universe from ours, has time-travel effects -- with the ability to store and release gigawatt-hours, which is a useful amount of energy at the city-scale IRL given current amounts of energy consumption/waste. Speaking of waste -- another source of actual gigawatt-hours is cutting consumption by not (wasting time making stupid jokes about fake universes ---just excuse me I'm having a crabby moment :
I love hearing about new solutions like this. I was excited for sodium due to the sheer availability of it, but had never considered graphite.
Sodium is fantastic on paper, but I believe to apply it, it requires a ton of water, which unfortunately is a resource that's becoming more and more limited, especially in places that would most benefit from solar energy. There's always catch22.
I think the correct direction for energy technology is towards energy independence, meaning every home should produce and store it's own energy. This tech does not seem well suited to this direction. But it does seem very interesting for something like a communal moon base.
I agree with you. Decentralize energy and food systems to a hyper-local source, in the home, and hope the transition away from globalized supply chains takes hold without crazy civil resistance and upheaval.
I actually think a little less decentralization is advantageous. Yes, ideally, in a vacuum, what you said would be the norm. But, in terms of privacy, if you plan to sell excess energy back to some utility for those who do not invest in such tech, thereby breaking even on the longest term maintenance and replacement fees (sustainable), then having a neighborhood entity act on your behalf is an advantage. The utility could see Neighborhood 1's energy production for the grid, but not the individual members of the co-op/corporation. In this way, it is private how much energy each household uses, creates, or sells back to the grid. If run as a non-profit, this masking effect is absolute. If it returns profits to shareholders (the neighborhood's residents), they do so with their own payout structure, and until a transfer of money is required, it remains private (you could credit their account with kilowatt hours until they wished a full or partial withdraw of its agreed to value).
I think you & many commenters are missing the point that this does unusual feat of enabling genuinely long term high power energy storage, whilst having potentially relative high efficiency (possibly over 50% which is high for such a long term storage; relative to others that offer say a few-many months of storage). It also seems quite modular & relatively compact ; compared to say pumped hydro. All this whilst still offering long term season to season storage. Also on offer is the ability to reduce & significantly boosts its output power levels. Obviously a few testbed commercial plants need building, to assess its true usefulness. Seemingly we should be trying to establish as manyfold methods of energy storage & generation, as possible; before a good mix will emerge.
Communal systems are usually more efficient and cost effective, like having a laundry room in the building versus having individual machines on each kitchen. Heat storage is more efficient the bigger the storage element is, as heat is lost based on surface, but capacity depends on volume, which scales faster. That's the same reason why giant insects wouldn't "work" in real life.
Or a communal earth base.
Also known as a City.
"Gallium arsenide can absorb relatively more incident radiation because of the relatively higher absorption coefficient" is a tautology, like saying "it's more efficient because it has greater efficiency", or "it can absorb more because it's more absorbent."
100 Joules of heat gives 35 Joules of electricity by spinning a turbine. Or 40 joules by TPV. Who wouldn't do this ? The storage breakthrough is also amazing.
Amazing the amount of information that you must go through in a month. I'm glad that there is someone like you that can sift through this information and find some of the important kernels and then put it out in a more understandable fashion for some of us. Thank you Ricky.
This is by far one of the better channels on TH-cam. Always so fascinating👏
I saw this from a article early this year and I could see this being used in space to use waste heat to make electricity as well to cool certain components down or other things.
Also, carbon heat storage could be compared to the lava field near Hilo Hawaii. Some of the lava deposited there in the early 50's still hasn't fully cooled.
Very interesting use of thermal dynamics.
Looks interesting for sure! Of course it all hinges on the 'what ifs' that will only be identified/addressed when a prototype is up and running. Will be interesting to see what the durability will be. Hey... another piece of the puzzle potentially.
Thank you for putting out this information. I am studying the PV/Thermal field and you provide a lot of good information for research projects and reports for class.
Seems like good science but the safety aspects of such a system will add complexity. The first thing that jumps out at me is the water cooling will need to be comprised of three independent systems running simultaneously, each of which must be capable of handling 100% of the cooling. It will be interesting to see the prototype in operation.
And the water cooling... Ugh
Very enjoyable video. One bad number. Your efficiency for turbines refers to gas turbines, which are inefficient, but were commonly used for peak power consumption times. Steam turbines, combined with the reheat piping in a standard boiler produce efficiencies in the 90's. A gas fired or coal fired power plant has an overall efficiency in the low 70's (burner efficiency x turbine efficiency x generator efficiency).
To be effective this system needs to really be collecting sunlight directly as a thermal energy via highly concentrated sunlight. Then your not going from 20-30% efficient solar to a crude resistence heater then back to electricity at 50% to get a total efficiency of 10-15%. With direct solar heat capture your looking at close to 100% initial sunlight capture and then 50% conversion and 50% final output from the same area of solar farm.
Your losing 60% to 70% at night when the sun is down. This could run 24/7 as long as temperatures can be maintained. My concern is cost, which system is a 50 year average roi.
I used to use a solar calculator at night using the house lighting you have in most houses. And I mean as a calculator not a bookmark. Never noticed any errors. I do remember thinking why couldn't you have a box with a bulb inside to generate more. Then I went back to reading my book.
The main problem with molten tin is that if something goes wrong, and the heat drops below the melting point, all of the tin solidifies. So the system cannot ever be allowed to cool down.
in such a case, would we not simply... re-heat the tin?
@@aronalle In all of the pipework ?
@@terryhayward7905 sure. as long as you can put in more heat than escapes through the insulation, it'll all melt.
Yeah, we where running calculators with pv cells off of indoor lighting back in the 80s-90s too. Replacing the old 60 watt light bulb with a giagantic friggin light bulb doesn't really make the idea any better. It just turns downright stupid when you're needing to liquid cool the thing to boot.
What's to prevent the molten tin from solidifying within those massive graphite blocks? And how does the system recover when that happens?
Tin melts at 231.9 C - a temperature that is easily attained. You could send heated argon down the pipes to melt out the tin if needed. However, you only need to keep the graphite heated above the melt point to prevent solidification. If you have a loss of heating, then you drain the system when the tin is down to say 500C and restart it later after bringing the system back up to a high enough temperature for the tin to circulate.
You could embed electric heating elements near the tin circulation piping to act as an in place restart system. It would also be useful for allowing you to take the system offline for maintenance without having to drain the system; i.e for replacing tpv elements or tungsten emitters.
We have many liquid metal systems, it is a problem our species has many solutions for. Most systems use electric heaters similar to a kiln at both startup & shutdown; but liquid steel for one example is usually kept liquid with coal, the same fuel usually used to melt it in the first place. So basically you usually pick an off the shelf solution that best fits your application.
You don't and the payback on investmentb for this "system" with maintenance costs and build would exceed it's expected life.
One cool way they store energy today is when there's excess being produced, they pump water into dams. Then when demand increases they can generate with hydro electric. Another storage is giant fly wheels. Energy spins them faster and faster to store, and reverse to extract the energy.
I'm wondering if large LTD stirling engines have a place in this process. I think NASA had made one that had vertually no friction but it was not LTD. It was used buy the military in Humvees exhaust gas to run things like water purifiers etc.
Experience to date shows that in general materials at extreme temperatures are unstable and therefore system components degrade too quickly.
When a number of challenges to success with materials operating under extreme stress exists, the probability of success decreases accordingly.
IMO that is the long and short of it.
Good luck with the development of this thermophotovoltaic system or whatever system may flow out of it.
The near moltent titanium being above the collector (as drawn) seems potentaily problematic. Switching that around might be a good idea.
I thought that the moment I saw the animation!!!!
I guess someone else was of the notion, "it's raining down sunshine"..... Gravity, and all that.
Titanium?
Tungsten. Not molten, but hot enough to emit light across a wide band of wavelengths. Like an incandescent lightbulb.
This technology will be available to the public in 2082, maybe a little earlier. We all know how this works, for the past two decades I've seen a jaw-dropping breakthrough in technology, but the day you heard about it will be the last day you may ever hear about it.
Vinci just to clarify at 11 minutes you stat that a one meter square cell could produce 100 kilowatts. Is that from the tungsten foil glow? I thought it only produced about double the light energy of the sun. The sun produces over one kilowat per square meter and 50% would be about 500 watts per square meter out in the sun. Even that would be great because it would allow electric cars to run around town on 6 or so meters of solar on the roof and hood and trunk without depleting the battery and sit in the sun and recharge for highway use.
Yeah, but how far would you get when you tie your new mattress on your car and happen to cover/shade all those energy cells!!!??? Lol🤣🤣 From a 70 year old great grandma who had to be tutored by her teacher to barely pass algebra! I am AMAZED by all the scientific minds commenting on these sites! KUDOS!!👍🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼👵🏻💞
@@deborahturner1853 I have done the mattress thing a few times. The answer is to get a solar powered posturepedic matress.
Thanks for this introduction to TPV. Eventually a viable technology will be developed that we can actually use to capture the abundant energy that hits the earth for routine use. Keep us informed!
You bet Gary!
As always. Could, Might, Possible, etc.. Let's hope for some real breakthroughs. How much energy is used to heat the tin to become a liquid, as that is part of the efficiency equation in reality. Where does that energy come from and what is the efficiency of producing that energy. it's complicated.
I think part of the idea is to use solar or wind energy to get something like tin hot then use that as the energy source when there's no wind or sunlight 🤔
@@ninjaxorgmail Not realistic. If you have no solar for several days and no wind either (Reality at times) then the tin never gets hot or useful. None of these alternatives are the answer yet. Too many technology combinations that try to cover all the bases is too expensive and there are no guarantees and so far, efficiency is pretty low, expensive and requires too many compromises that are not healthy for the earth or people.
What's really strange that when observing the factual data history of the earths temperature, we are below the mean and optimal is a bit warmer than we are now. They never mention what is optimal for planet health.
@@gecsus realistically, nuclear is the clear choice IMHO. It produces much less hazardous waste that solar or wind.
@@ninjaxorgmail On this we agree.
Cell efficiency sure has gone up from what we worked with in the 80s. We were getting around 18% while being under a lense which was equal to 15 suns(best I can remember).
There's just one glarring question: How do they heat it up so much without using more energy than they put out?
This just sounds like more pie in the sky! Especially with climate change!!
Redirected excess electricity generation.
True it cost more more to put in than they get out.
But its made to use up unstored (wasted energy) without using up valuable light weight lithium
Think hydro dam after a storm. About to be dumped
Convert movement into electricity - use electricity to make heat-
Store heat not electricity- then convert to electricity when needed.
More or less
Love that last idea of possibly putting thermal batteries co-located near other industries that have a significant heat by-product and be able to harness what is currently 'waste'.
Technically speaking heat is light. Heat is infrared light - its just lower frequency.
Well it's a bit more nuanced then that.
Heat is a form of energy and thermodynamicly a 'measurement' of the average movement of atoms.
Heat transfer can occur through the processies of condution, convetion or radiation (aka light).
Heat isn't light. Light is a byproduct of certain visible frequencies. Heat is a radiation of said frequencies.
You are incorrect: both are electromagnetic radiation, but of different frequencies. When light strikes a surface it can be absorbed and re-emitted at a different frequency.
@@michaeldeleted Wrong. Everything is in waves, but it is not "light" in itself.
Light specifically is excited by photons in a certain range of frequencies. That being said, waves and particles being moved as such is described as light. However, heat isn't electromagnetic. It's kinetic energy.
"When light strikes a surface it can be absorbed and re-emitted at a different frequency." - Except heat itself doesn't entirely behave that way, therefore it is not the same as light and couldn't be comparable.
@@AAFREAK I'm sorry if my one sentence post that was a slight oversimplification offended y'all, but I assure I know how this works. I was referring to the heat energy emitted from an object that you can feel as heat, or see with an infrared camera. That IS infrared radiation and it IS light. That is also the very thing the video was about.
50% efficiency is pretty good, about double that of a gasoline engine. So that raises an interesting question.
Suppose you made a rectangular prism with dimensions around 60x45x45 cm with the four internal large faces covered in this thermophotovoltaic material and backed with a cooling system. That gives you about 1 square meter which should be good for around 100kW, according to the video. Down the center of the cavity you run a tungsten tube into which you inject burning fuel (gasoline, diesel, maybe hydrogen, etc.) to heat the tube to the target temperature (maybe pre-heating the fuel-air mix by using it in a secondary coolant loop).
That would give you a lightweight, compact, clean, quiet, no-moving-parts gasoline-powered electric generator with output power about the same as the gasoline engine in a Toyota Prius, but with around double the efficiency (and probably even better emissions). Add a relatively small lithium battery to provide energy storage and a somewhat larger electric drive motor and you've got a hybrid that might approach 100 MPG with dramatically reduced mechanical complexity.
This tech seems rather unplausible and is still very far away from any commercial adoption - according to the scientists' own roadmap, it's not even clear if basic reliability criteria can be met or such TPV cells can be mass produced. At this point, slapping peltier elements with heatsinks + some fans onto all kinds of processes that create waste heat in order to turn the thermal gradient back into electrical energy seems more viable. Heck, they could even increase the conversion efficiency of steam turbies.
Very Interesting. A Better application might be to use this "Solar cell" for the power conversion system of a Molten Salt Reactor (MSR). MSRs are advanced (gen IV) nuclear reactors that promise greater fuel burnup and can run on Thorium or Uranium, and some are looking to consume Spent Nuclear Fuel. What is interesting as that MSRs can typically generate higher temperatures, about 1200F. If 50% efficient thermal to electrical conversion can be achieved at this temperature, this cell might be a better solution than a steam turbine or even a closed Brayton cycle power conversion system which is theoretically capable of 50% efficiency, but I don't believe any have been built at scale.
100 kW / m^2? Holy cow, that's a lot of radiation. 100 times brighter than the sun - is that real? I guess it's all in the infrared, but still, that's insane.
This technology sounds like it would be a LOT more useful for making a) hybrid cars powered by natural gas and b) natural gas fired power plants more efficient. Back in the 1990's I knew some guys in Issaquah, WA, called Krystal Corp I believe, who were making a desktop sized generator that used some triple junction cells around a stack of ceramic disks with a natural gas flame heating them white hot, with mirrors in a star pattern focusing the emitted photons to vertical rows of triple junction cells. They were getting 36.5% efficiency back then, in the 1995 period.
That looks like a Rube Goldberg contraption, which according to my experience will become quite expensive, because it has so many points of failure.
Why not ditch the storage part, and just put them /beneath/ any given conventional rooftop photovoltaics rack, so that they can collect the heat portion of the sunlight, and make a double use of the solar energy, even at a high latitude?
Actually, I am living in a house with rooms right beneath the tiles; and the temperature in my room never went below 25 degrees Celsius (that is 77° Fahrenheit) for three months straight, even at night. I would have loved to remove that heat and make better use of it, instead of seeing it go to waste, or even worse, consume precious energy because of an air conditioner running 24/7.
Sounds legit. it all makes sense. when it scales and updated with more efficiency. could be a real game changer
*41% converted to electric power? NOT BLOODY LIKELY!* At 10:37 "tungsten filament at 2400 degrees C" (2673 K), that Tungsten (or any other blackbody emitter) will radiate over 2.8 _megawatts_ per square meter. With TPV output of 0.1 megawatts per square meter, the implied efficiency of TPV is a mere 3.5 percent! Plus it is extremely difficult to get concentrated sunlight to deliver such a high temperature, because whatever you use to absorb the light will re-radiate megawatts per square meter, and lose even more by convection of air on the exposed surface. All other heat sources are FAR cooler than what sunlight can theoretically deliver (5800 K), except for primary combustion. Sure, they might use this TPV thing to convert combustion heat, but at an utterly lousy 3.5% efficiency? No, no, no!!! And then that TPV requires aggressive cooling, which means a low temperature of the waste heat from cooling it. No way to regain efficiency there! The math for 2000 °C is even crazier. The video explanation given just totally fails to work.
Their efficiency number, I suspect, is the efficiency of the cell itself - not factoring in all the losses in the whole system. The whole thing sounds fantastical. The mirror at the bottom of that box makes no sense - clearly just reflects most of the light in a different direction away from the cell. And we scale the whole thing by just putting in a thousand of the cubes? Completely ignoring the cooling requirements explained a moment earlier. The whole thing sounds laughable. This is with absolute certainty another scam - making fantastical claims and presenting a bunch of wildly misleading numbers.
And we never hear the guy on this channel disclaim if he was paid by the company. I find this channel not trustworthy at all. I don't know if that's because the guy is taking bribes or if he's really that naive. Either way, I'm finally blocking this channel, which I should have done 5 videos ago. It's all like this. I'm done giving this channel my time and the benefit of the doubt. 👎
Indeed, this project is completely unworkable, horribly complex and links multiple technologies requiring containment. Non-starter. No investor would spend $10 on this
it reminds me a little bit of a nuclear power plant, where you have movable steering rods. uk, also had an experimental reactor (think it was in the 1950s to 80s..) where they used graphite blocks with inner tubing to transfer heat with some fluid mix into water -> turbines ->electricity. thank you for your video about this new thermophotovoltaic cell! very interesting technology. with a tungsten "bulb" and a phototherm "feedback" reflector. genial.
It is less complicated related to legacy coal/steam power station. Probably cheaper too.
But compared to a solar panel + battery combo? Something is off in their calculation.
First, you get energy from some source that generates high temp, high enough to melt the metal. You already lost some of energy there.
Then you transport the liquid metal through the carbon "battery". You lost some of energy again.
Then when you actually want the electricity, you transfer the heat to tungsten plate (you lose some of energy there) which will transfer the energy to TPV cells, that are now at 41% efficiency and could be in theory up to a 50%. You are also cooling down those cells and heat is lost in the heating the water.
How much of energy have been lost from the initial source (back where we were melting the metal) to the moment the electricity is flowing to a grid?
It simply does not add up.
Now, for sure, we HAVE to find a way to use all the heat that is wasted all around the industry. Multilayered cells seems like a great thing. And infra based cells are good.
I wanted to ask a question but I didn't want to seem stupid. Admittedly I know next to nothing about this. But my first thought was, don't you need energy to create the heat? I'm glad to see you have similar questions.
Clever engineering, but not the answer the world needs
Nuclear doses 😊
Whenever I hear MIT I am super wary. They don't come up with anything novel. They are just loud and get lots of attention.
They just make things better 😊
The comparisons are all over the place.. Those cells are competing mainly against combined cycle turbines (at 60% eff.) and are >>composite
Thank you, great video as always. Might I suggest using a deesser or some other audio enhancement to deal with the “mouth noices”. Amazing video thou, thank you 🥇🙏
3M in the 70s did something similar . they used a thermocouple to charge batteries from winding it around an exhaust manifold on a train which gave good charge to the batteries. i tried to find out what the thermocouple was made of but could not find out as it was hush hush and i was an appie. i worked for saa at the time but the experiment was done at sar.
I bet it was asbestos 😀
@@lukewarm2075 no a thermocouple is two dissimilar metals . the voltage is generated at the junction of the two
This is first new tech that sort of gets me excited. It seems to me that this system can reside in cities close to where people need it without worrying about killing ourselves or burning down our homes. All joking aside please keep up updated on the pilot testing of this tech.
Now that is some neat technology that may have been here way before we were. Thanks for sharing!
The back mirror is a great idea, I told someone years ago, that it would take decades before we see improved solar cells. I was wrong. Hope they hit scale production sooner rather than later.
This sounds great - as a generator for a traditional heat source. If you use it for fluctuating energy like solar or wind, you would still suffer unnecessary losses.
The heat shielding on spacecraft is called ablative shielding. It's designed to shed itself, and take thermal energy away with the pieces. In a sense, designed to fail in a controlled manner, like a fuse.
I used to measure a DC voltage being produced across the terminals of a disconnected, Ohmite resistor. I would first run a high current through the Ohmite resistor. Next, I would disconnect the Ohmite resistor. As the resistor cools, it produces a measurable DC voltage across its two terminals.
This is similar to a gas +PV attachment I had proposed and tinkered with in the 90's. I had found that a brand of highly efficient gas heaters burned a bright yellow that would charge a photocell from half to full capacity. The problem I ran into was soot (microparticles) in and leaking from the combustion chamber. It builds up too fast on the photocell and any glass divider in the chamber. I only got one week (8 days) of full capacity, and a sharp decline to 30%! Soot attracts soot. And yes, a filter for the intake was already part of the system.
You are one of the few honest videos on the net. So many pie in the sky claims. Where does the heat come from initially at 2000C?
Folks ought to check out LUMELOID and QUENSOR, they are both built on thin film conductive polymers and both were patented by Alvin Marks. LUMELOID can be thought of as an array of polarizing nanoscale antennas tuned to absorb electromagnetic waves in the UV, visible and IR at about 96% efficiency. QUENSOR uses fluorine to create carbon/fluorine capacitors along a stretch oriented array of conductive, each capacitor as I recall used 4 atoms
3:18 Graphene atom? It's not an element Graphene is made out of carbon atoms.
Love this video, the only constant in this old world is change!
Yes! Yet another fantastic steppingstone on the way to THE solution. I too see a brilliant future.
Sounds super expensive and not economically viable. I do like the idea of fixing the concentrated solar array, due to the fact that heat is the most abundant source of free energy. Our sun provides all the energy we need, and systems that harness heat and expend the heat are ideal. We spend so much on cooling our homes in hot areas, but all we do is dump the heat right outside our homes. If we could only use that heat instead of wasting it. We would be set. Unfortunately it's insanely expensive to implement discoveries like tpv.
Renewable energy science, and material science too, is so exciting in the modern era and I fell we are about to be in the golden age of the sciences. I wish I had decided to study this instead of computer science. I feel we are on the verge of some incredible discoveries within the next couple of decades or less
A wave's kinetic energy can easily be converted into potential energy by raising a mass with each wave that passes.
This potential energy can be converted into electricity by coupling the mass to a generator and lowering it when desired.
If the distance to the customer is too large to transport electricity via power lines, converting the wave's kinetic energy to potential energy first is wasteful.
It can still be used locally to desalinate seawater (to name but a hot topic) or generate hydrogen and then be shipped out.
The advantages are that this can be scaled up more than most land based energy storage devices, the price of ocean being low compared to the price of land and the many more regulations a land based design must adhere to. The disadvantage is distance to customer. Fortunately, most of us live near the coast.
As you mentioned, the heat energy storage module using is really a separate technology from the TPV heat to electricity module.
If the TPV module is really that efficient (and cheaper), it could potentially replace steam turbines *whereever* they are used to generate electricity, not just in renewable energy storage. This might include natural gas power plants, coal power plants, nuclear power plants, and as you mentioned, concentracted solar power plants. I imagine a solid state power generator would be so much more reliable and long lasting than a steam turbine, which has moving parts that wear out.
I wonder how much power it could gain back from cooled devices...
I mean, seriously, think about it. We have CPU's in our PC and phones and such things, right? Those have cooling blocks on them with thermal paste to quickly transfer the heat away from it as these things go 100+ degrees within about 1.5 seconds.
What if we turned the cooling blocks into a TPV module? How efficient would it be at turning that heat back into energy? Even if this could only catch 20% of the actual heat back into energy, we'd be saving 20% of energy on an industry which right now uses about 20% of all of our energy.
It's probably not realistic, but a man can dream.
Omg! YES Finally a better way then steam 😆.
Q1): can we order a 1-3sided tpv
Q2): Could it be run next to a candle to maybe recharge a AAA or AA battery.
Q3): (if im donated one to my to test with my long burning candles 24-75days worth) could I direct order more at a much more reasonable cost say $25/TPV?
Oooooo the possibilities!!!
Thank you for the video and the info, great work mah dude, keep it up! 😁😊
Interesting technology. Tungsten is used in the standard light bulb (Edison’s invention). Tungsten light bulbs typically don’t have a long life. Is that due to heat cycle degradation of turning the light on and off? Perhaps they are using a tungsten compound that gives it a longer life? Hopefully, they will have success. However, relying on excess green energy for this process may prove difficult as electrical energy demands are increasing, especially with the thinking that all coal, oil, and gas electrical plants can be eliminated and we can’t use nuclear because politicians have been lobbied to believe that it is dangerous.
I use sunshine to make electricity, but not initially. I use Sunshine for what it is, namely, heat. I concentrate that heat and make steam, then run that against a homemade turbine and transmission, which is coupled to a generator, alternator actually, and I make my own electricity that way. All the stuff you talk about is very interesting, but in my opinion, very impractical. I say we use the heat of the Sun as it is and not try to manipulate it into all these other exotic things, which have their own set of problems to be overcome. Just keep it simple.
Turbines efficiencies are based on the mechanical energy obtained using the carnot cycle. The efficiency scales with the ratio of the hot zone and cold zone, thus if you had a 2500K Hot zone the Turbine would a far more efficient solution than the usual.
Renewables also need several hundred times the land area of a nuclear plant. Example is Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Any area of 500ac produces the amount of power that would require 78 square miles for renewables to produce.
there is the concept of a 'hot mirror' , which is a material which reflects wavelenghts of infrared which contribute most to heat, and lets shorter wavelengths of light pass through
I'm surprised that it doesn't get a mention here, such a material would only let short enough wavelengths of light through to the photoelectric cell, while reflecting longer wavelength infrared back to the tungsten to preserve its thermal energy
So they reinvented a Peltier, mixed it with solar and made it hard to melt. Result pretty good power source. Cool stuff.
This method of energy storage seems overly complicated and requires huge resources.
Fossil fuels still are the most practical way to provide the energy we need.
TPV sounds amazing. I do hope this is developed and implemented.
It would really come into play for fission plants in areas where water for steam and cooling for a pressure gradient for a turbine to work isn't available, like future Luna and Mars colonies, or even desert cities where fresh water is better used for other things, like indoor farming (most efficient use of water for food production) and water for resident's personal use.
Even in building new fission and eventually fusion plants, the turbine building can be replaced with these to really cut down on maintenance costs.
Sounds ingenious!
I am new to your channel, and I am finding your presentations very informative and easily consumable. Thank you for the hard work and excellent research.
I liked how I was able to follow you along without confusion. I seen the previous videos discussed in this presentation and I have a good imagination. I live in Alaska with solar panels and a windmill and a 80 gallon gas hot water heater tank as a heat battery that doesn't do anything but hold heat and heat my room from that which was stored making the sand heat battery solution appealing to me. Magnet engines. To get GPT 4 to engineer and test within a deep learning system and then 3D print the device to put the magnets into doesn't sound far-fetched to me, harnessing magnetics to generate electricity. Imagine a 5000 watt magnet generator in every automobile that plugs into the wall when not in use producing power for the grid. That's the product that will save the future that I want to create. And then you've seen a motor that spins a flywheel that spins a generator that keeps everything going Plus useful power. Oh you can't do that but some magic of magnetics, capacitors, flywheels and gear ratios gives me an optimistic viewpoint of the possibilities. I have seen handmade little ones that produce no useful power but they spin on their own and a real engine of sort powered purely by magnets in a Korean version has a place on the factory floor. Why aren't these machines flying out of a factory? Several different kinds are shown on TH-cam. Any thoughts on how to get started and getting into production without being sued by The Honorable Senator Mnuchin?
These 'breakthroughs' come and go,never to be mentioned again.
Celsius = sell-see-us . Rock on and keep them coming!
Fascinating! Could this system be used as a way to extract energy from "hot" nuclear "waste" (the "spent" fuel rods that otherwise have to be kept in cooling pools)?
Good question but I believe it would have to be adapted.
FYI the conversion ratio for when americans say "can power tens of thousands of homes" is currently about 2.84.
So the energy required for 10.000 US homes would power 28.400 EU homes on average. (or 61.800 Finnish homes).
Though that will probably change as the EU moves away from gas heating, and we install more air conditioning further up north, since even now few governments seem to take climate change seriously and the effects are becoming very noticable.
You could line a rocket skirt with these cells during launch and generate electricity to help run electric hydraulic pumps for small rocket chambers.
Excited YES.. very interesting indeed. Looking forward to seeing advancements on this.
Thank you for Your research and for making it so clear
Pretty funny, one of the cheapest ways to generate electricity, but also one of the most expensive. There aren’t many ways to generate electricity really, after all, wind and hydroelectric are both solar in actuality. Tho it can be dangerous, nuclear is still the cheapest way by far and doesn’t require all the rare minerals from other countries, and doesn’t cover the landscape with panels or giant windmills. That being said, super interesting video.