Hacker News Reader

Comment by ck2 | Hacker News Reader

How about hanging solar panel vertically on tall buildings covering every floor except the first few to prevent vandalism

As the earth moves the sun would only hit one side and lose efficiency but right now it's "free space" not being used otherwise

They even make flexible solar panels now that can bend and move with the wind and don't need a stiff frame, slightly less efficient but volume makes up for that

Clean them the same way automated window washers work on skyscrapers

Shame they never came up with the solar paint solution, yet

View on HN

> How about hanging solar panel vertically

The best explanation I've heard is from a PV installer. He said, "Every try to get a suntan standing up?" Seems you lose too much sun exposure to make it worthwhile.

> "Every try to get a suntan standing up?"

I didn't try to get a suntan, but I have gotten tans while standing up. It's called working outdoors (and not properly covering up, which I'm paying for now).

That said, the economics of vertical installations have changed. The cost of panels keeps going down, and as it does it's starting to make sense depending on your location and how you're orienting your vertical panels. Remember, almost all solar panel installations will be suboptimal unless they include a mechanism for tracking the sun. The question is how bad is suboptimal, what's the cost of the panels and what's their energy yield?

Distance from the equator helps. As does if it snows where the panels are, then vertical simply not having snow on them plus the reflection of the snow helps quite a bit in winter.

I've got many a sun burn standing as has anyone else who's toiled away outdoors doing something while shirtless and white...

I suspect it's more of a "hassle ain't worth it to lose 20%" type situation.

Could absolutely be worth if you can make that 20% back dodging permits because it's not flagrantly visible on the aerials like roof panels are.

I'll assume that installer is not near as Irish as I am.

Vertical mounted bifacial panels are more efficient than horizontal mounted panels.

? So everyone around the Mediterranean has a tan because they're sunbathing?

I see a lot of vertical solar here in Finland. Particularly on newer and/or industrial buildings. I think it's mostly a cost/effort/ROI issue plus sheer unwillingness to do new things.

Wouldn't the rooms inside need more lighting then? I wonder about where the break even point is on those differences. I'm not educated in this area enough to even guess.

I assume they mean on the bits that don't have windows. Though caution would be required there; you have to be very careful about tall building cladding material (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire).

Lighting, incidentally, is practically _free_ these days. An EU 'A' rated LED bulb has to do 210 lumens per watt. So the equiv of an old-fashioned 100W incandescent uses 7.5W.

It’s hard to retrofit that on existing buildings for reasons of structural integrity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com