• aidan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s not efficient, a huge amount of it gets diffused or absorbed

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It doesn’t need to be efficient. Capture all the light that hits earth for 5 minutes and that’s the world energy demand for a year.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s not efficient, a huge amount of it gets diffused or absorbed

      The amount that’s left over though is more than enough, especially with today panels which only convert a very small percentage of that remaining energy.

      As the panels improve even more they’ll be a very large energy surplus, even with how much solar light actually gets through the atmosphere.

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Wow, you’re right! We should just build a Dyson sphere around the sun. 100% efficiency achieved. What could possibly go wrong?

      • GojuRyu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Did you understand the person you respond to as saying its inefficient because the sun shines in other directions than the array proposed?
        I’m pretty sure the person talked specifically about the beam from the array to earth being inefficient.