this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2025
563 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

73035 readers
3259 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/24690127

Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.

The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.

The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.

The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 25 points 6 days ago (3 children)

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10938951

This is 36% MODULE efficiency with expensive cooling. 30% actual year long efficiency without it. Requires dual axis tracking. Seems heavy as its very tall/deep.

Headline of cost reduction is very unlikely. Especially on a per acre/fairly large area basis. Dual axis tracking requires more spacing than fixed orientation rows, and loses benefits under cloudy conditions. While power at 7am and 5pm is more valuable when competing against high penetration solar, batteries are now more competitive than tracking, and can serve edge of day and night power needs. Tracking solar tends not to be built anymore, due to low cost of panels. The cooling infrastructure is also not as useful as it is on rooftops because the heat capture has useful benefits for homes.

It is also unclear how this has advantage over parabolic mirror.

Agri PV is a real use case, where more free land means more land use, even if most of it gets more shade, except around noon.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Solar panels as fences is what is needed.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Kinda works if you use bifacial panels.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (6 children)

Bifacial panels as a fence provides 3% extra yield but 30% extra revenue

https://www.gridcog.com/blog/solar-fence-vs-ground-mount-solar

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago

It's viable as edge of day high power boost in east/west direction, and simply any extra power that is cheap and easy to install, that adds privacy or keeps the controlled beings inside.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago (2 children)

They need changes in laws too. Instead of chewing up open space and farmland I'd rather see more urban areas used like parking lots and industrial sites.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago

Yeah, Don't put the solar farms in meadows, or on mountains. put them on warehouse roofs, over highways, over parking lots, on government buildings, etc etc.

[–] taguebbe@feddit.org 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Roughly 50% of germany is used as farmland. On 60% of the farmland crops to feed livestock are grown. On 20% of it crops for energyproduction (biofuel, biogas). If you take for example rapeseeds, used for biodiesel, you would harvest around 50 times as much energy with a pv-plant on the same area. You would need to install pv on 5-6% of the farmland to produce enough electric energy for all of germany for a year. Granted you also can provide the grid for it and enoguh storage.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Not only that, but livestock can still graze under panels, on grass that often grows just as well with a little shade.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Surely the grass would grow better with more son(?)

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Not always. Wide open fields get baked dry mid summer in a lot of local climates.

Yup, my grass does best under my trampoline.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 44 points 6 days ago

The only thing slowing down the transition from fossil fuels to renewables is the same impediment it has always been: oil money protecting itself.

[–] tobiah@lemmy.world 21 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions"

Why would I want to compare one panel's average efficiency to another panels efficiency in ideal conditions?

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Marketing. Fresnel lenses are not going to do well with diffuse light.

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Maybe I'm misunderstanding but wouldn't diffuse light be what it's going to be best at? While it'd be worse on a sunny day when there is an optimal single direction for the light to come in?

It's the opposite of a light house fresnel lens - instead of scattering the light source evenly out, it'll capture diffuse incoming rays from random directions better and concentrate it on the photovoltaic cell? However it would be at the cost of being able to capture direct sunlight efficiently as only some of the lens would ever be in the best position to capture the direct rays?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (6 children)

I'm not sure what to think about the Fraunhofer institute in general. They have made some nice discoveries/inventions in the past, such as audio compression algorithms and such. That is why i hyped them for a bit.

But they really disappointed me with their writings on solar panels in the past few years.

They said that the efficiency of solar panels today is too low to deploy them widely in practice, which is simply not true. They tried pushing Perovskite solar cells for no reason.

I'm not sure what to think about this article's idea. On one hand, adding lenses to solar parks makes them significantly more complicated and therefore expensive to build. Also, if the parks have complicated physical forms, they're more susceptible to wind, and that could damage them.

On the other hand, yes, adding lenses means you need fewer actual solar panels for the same amount of energy harvested.

I'll therefore put it in the category of inconclusive inventions, together with the idea of adding a motor to the solar panels so they can track the sun. That would also make the solar panels more efficient, but also more complicated and more prone to mechanical failure.

[–] r_deckard@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'd like to know what they're going to do about the heating issue. Concentrating solar radiation carries with it an increased heat load. And heat reduces solar PV efficiency. I'm already losing about 30% in summer when the panels heat up.

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This was my first question too! I thought heat makes them wear out faster.

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

It does. Also seems weird nobody thought of a magnifying glass before.

But its also the beauty in science. Now somebody else thought about it, and they might work harder to fix the next problem: Heat.

If that gets better now, solar panels will increase in output even more. There are so many technologies going into one product, and each field have its own experts.

I'm excited.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] shaggyb@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

Banned in North America in 3... 2...

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago

That is Fraunhofer who are the people most responsible for developing MP3

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Oh don't worry, I'm sure the capitalist system will manage to fuck it up somehow.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 days ago

"If we allow german solar panels into america it will destroy our good hard working american businesses. Tarriffs on german solar panels of 69%!"

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Hey it's those guys that invented MP3s.

[–] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

It really whips the sun's ass.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Lossy compression of sunlight?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 10 points 6 days ago

I thought this has already been done. Guess there's some nuance to it that is above my understanding of it.

Anyhow, advancements in solar are cool in my book.

[–] Prior_Industry@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

US Government - not on my watch....

[–] Vinstaal0 3 points 5 days ago

The issue here in NL is with the power grid, not the price of the panels. The installing of them is already one of the most expensive parts of getting panels since you need to build scafolding for most houses.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

I have not read the article yet, but I will be doing so after posting this. But from what I understand, concentrated cells via lenses already exist. The problem with them was keeping them cool.

Going to go read the actual article now.

Edit: Well, the article was very sparse on details. From what I understand of the comments, what's really been done here is making cells that can stand the kind of heat that would be focused onto them from the glass.

I want to say I saw a video about this a year ago or so, but it was more solar thermal, where you focus a bunch of mirrors onto a single point high up on a tower, and it's cooled by molten salt. But as I said, that's solar thermal, not solar power electricity.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Yeah the problem has always been that solar panels only really like to operate within a very narrow temperature band. It's why you can't just plate the Sahara desert in solar panels. In theory that would generate loads of power but the heat of the desert is way outside of their operating range.

There's been loads of ideas to heat/cool solar panels, the problem up until now has always been to do that without cutting into the panel's efficiency so much that it isn't worth doing.

But there's been videos on YouTube of people cooling solar panels with plasma cooling and phase change materials for a few years now.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago

Just wanted to drop a comment.

I love solar. It's the best form of energy that's attainable by the average person.

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago

Concentrating solar cells have been around for decades, but I suppose the efficiency Fraunhofer achieved here is nothing to sneeze at.

load more comments
view more: next ›