the Otherpower.com Discussion Board || 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% efficent

Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Rants & Opinion - Diaries - Our Products

1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% efficent
By wooferhound, Section Solar Posted on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 12:06:09 PM MST
Company claims that 1 or 2 panels will power a house

I clicked on one of the Google Ads that appear on the righthand side of these webpages. This site claims to be making multilayered solar panels using 5 silicon junctions tuned to 5 different wavelengths of light. Here is a small bit copied from the webpage...
----------------
DBK CORPORATION
DBK's new technologically advanced (MEL) solar panels are using 70 percent of the sun wavelengths instead of 17 percent. This is link to DC to DC conversion process that gets the 1500 or the 3000 watts needed to supply your home or business. One or two JIL panels are all that is needed for most homes, 5-6 panels for most small businesses.
---------------
http://www.dbksolar.com/index.htm

1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% efficent | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 editorial)

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels a... (3.00 / 0) (#1)
by AbyssUnderground on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 06:09:43 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.repowered.co.uk

I'll beleive this when I see it for real.

http://www.repowered.co.uk - My Renewable Energy site.
msn[at]m3ezw.co.uk - my msn if you want a chat.

CLAIM TO BE 70% efficent (3.00 / 0) (#2)
by Volvo farmer on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 06:27:01 AM MST
(User Info)

These sort of claims have been flying around the solar industry for so long, they almost don't get my attention anymore. Some very wierd stuff there. I can't buy any panels until March but I could sign up to become a dealer for only 10% down??

Anyway, On their spec sheet they claim a 1500 watt grid tied system costs $19K and theirs is a bargain at $12.5K. Installation not included.

I just bought a couple name brand polycrystalline 170W panels for $800 ea. For a 1500W system, panels would cost $7200 and a Fronius IG4000 runs about $2900. So that's a bit over $10,000. Or I could spend 25% more, on a completely new, unproven degign of solar panel that I can't even buy for two months.

Maybe these guys are for real, time will tell I suppose.

Volvo Farmer

May you always have success in your quest to irritate those who you despise. -Ben Goode

Re: CLAIM TO BE 70% efficent (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by craig110 on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 07:41:22 AM MST
(User Info)

I looked at their pages, and the specs just don't add up. I've sent them an email asking to clarify the numbers and will post a summary of their answers here.

Craig

[ Parent ]

Sometimes things ARE what the seem... (3.00 / 0) (#4)
by zap (bell47g5a at comcast dot net) on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 08:30:56 AM MST
(User Info)

As Volvo farmer said, maybe it's for real but a company's web site usually says quite a bit about them if you take some time and really look.

Ignoring all the numerous grammatical errors and general 'cheesy' appearance of most every page on their site, you still have tings such as:

They talk about their fuel cells and leading off that page they show what appears to be a picture of an Asian assembly line for scooters.

In their FAQ they pose a question about using PV for water or space heating and then reply with an answer which refutes their claim of 70 percent efficiency. "Photovoltaics converts(sic) the sun's energy into DC electricity at a relatively low efficiency level (14-16%), so trying to operate a high power electric..." If their panels are indeed 70% efficient then using their panels for heating would be more efficient, although not necessarily cheaper, than using a simple batch heater which I think are usually around 50% efficient. Also, if their panels are indeed that efficient and came out 3 quarters ago, I'm sure you would have seen news about them plastered everywhere.

Probably one of the better errors, on their employment page they list a job opening.
"Accounting Dept: Supervisor, Parable's(sic) Clerks,..."

From Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:
"par-a-ble: a usually short fictitious story..."

zap
[ Parent ]

Re: Sometimes things ARE what the seem... (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by Titantornado on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 11:02:30 AM MST
(User Info)

> Probably one of the better errors, on their employment page
> they list a job opening. "Accounting Dept: Supervisor,
> Parable's(sic) Clerks,..."
>
> From Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:
> "par-a-ble: a usually short fictitious story..."

LOL, well, ya can't say they didn't tell ya what's going on there!

Rod

[ Parent ]

1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% efficent (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by richhagen (richhagen (a t) Juno.com) on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 02:09:21 PM MST
(User Info)

There is a saying - "If it sounds too good to be true . . ." that comes to mind here. I expect that if someone produces even prototypes at 70% efficiency, it would be huge news and lots of people would stop and take serious notice. The economic, political, and environmental impact of the availability of such panels at reasonable cost would be Earth shaking. That is a multiple of the efficiency of the highest end panels currently used on satelites and the International Space Station. Rich
'A Joule saved is a Joule made'

70% of wavelengths, not efficiency (3.00 / 0) (#7)
by richhagen (richhagen (a t) Juno.com) on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 02:13:50 PM MST
(User Info)

I just noted that the post says uses 70% of the available wavelengths, not 70% efficient, which is different from being 70% efficient. If it uses a fraction of the available light across a fraction of the available wavelengths, the efficiency is a smaller fraction still. Rich
'A Joule saved is a Joule made'
[ Parent ]

Re: 70% of wavelengths, not efficiency (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by willib (willibur at comcast dot net) on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 09:59:54 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.njwind.com/webcam.html#

i have been waiting for two years for Evident Technology to use their Evidots in some sort of a solar panel.
i've given up waiting
the technology is there , for increased efficiency , using more of the electromagnetic spectrum
particularly the infrared is quite interesting
Carpe Ventum (seize the wind)
[ Parent ]

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by kamikaze on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 at 10:49:38 PM MST
(User Info)

Hi,
The big 3000w panel is given as 50in x 40in which is about 1.29 sq metres. The accepted power from bright sunlight is 1kw per sq metre, so they are claiming an output of 230% of the maximum available power from sunlight. I don't think so.
Inter Ventos Laboramus ( in the winds we work )

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by fungus (info@reenergy.co.uk) on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 05:40:55 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.reenergy.co.uk/

This is a funny one as well:

The input into the dc-dc inverter is 950 Watts. It rates the panels at 1500w and 3000w so this cant really be true.

'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'-Albert Einstein
Fungus - www.reenergy.co.uk

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#11)
by craig110 on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 at 08:35:23 AM MST
(User Info)

This, and the output claims compared to the surface area, are items that I mentioned in my email asking for clarifications. I'd really like to hear a response back from them, but, sadly, I suspect I won't.

[ Parent ]

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by craig110 on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 03:50:08 PM MST
(User Info)

I've had two rounds of email exchanges with this company, and the answers are getting humorous. Lets just say that even with me wanting to expand my solar setup, I won't be buying one of their panels. (Not that I would have before the email exchange...)

[ Parent ]

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#13)
by Volvo farmer on Fri Dec 29th, 2006 at 07:46:54 PM MST
(User Info)

Hello friends at DBK corporation.

I have a friend in USA that wishes to become a dealer in your solar panels. However we have a large check in possesion for investment purposes that must be disbursed immediately. We will send you check for $20,000 USD for which $5000 USd will be used for dealership cost. Could you then return to me the $15000 amount over the cost of the dealership? For your benefit, The barrister at our corporation has authorized me to allocate an extra $2500 for your trouble in arranging the transfer so the amount returned would only be $12,500.

We will send the check out right away, Please send the remainder via Western Union to box 419, Lagos, Nigeria.

Your friend,

Noaho Muwomba.

Volvo Farmer

May you always have success in your quest to irritate those who you despise. -Ben Goode
[ Parent ]

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#14)
by RP (russp located-at fidnet (dot) com) on Sat Dec 30th, 2006 at 12:12:35 AM MST
(User Info)

Ha Ha Ha That's a good one

[ Parent ]

Re: 1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% (3.00 / 0) (#15)
by twombo on Mon Jan 1st, 2007 at 08:19:31 PM MST
(User Info)

Do you take PayPal???

Mike

[ Parent ]

1500 & 3000 watt Solar Panels are 70% efficent | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 editorial)

Menu

� create account
� How to use the board
� FAQs
� search the board
� Google search the board
� Old Otherpower Board

Login

Make a new account

Username:

Password:

Total Views

��194 Scoop users have viewed this posting.

Related Links

� http://www.dbksolar.com/index. htm
� Also by wooferhound

You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest � 2003 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!