Hacker News Reader

What the article needed was a comparison with 'normal' white paint, otherwise reporting 99.6% is not meaningful. The linked story https://newatlas.com/materials/super-white-paint-teflon-98-s... mentions that traditional paint reflects 85% of solar radiation.

85% -> 99.6% is an improvement, but not like a game-changer.

View on HN

85% -> 99.6% is a ~35X reduction is absorbed solar energy. Definitely a game-changer. (Assuming it holds up in real-world use, etc.)

No, it isn't necessarily. 99.6% to 99.9999996% would be a "one million X" reduction in absorbed solar energy, but it would be of no consequence whatsoever because it would be well below the noise floor of any useful effect (see other people's comments about dust, etc.). The multiplicative factor of the reduction itself is not the relevant thing here. The real effect on a building would have to be measured.

yes, but when buildings painted white already get warm from sunlight, we can safely say that a ~35x reduction will be meaningful, as opposed to the example you provided where there will be no observable effect as you correctly pointed out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com