Post B6AKtvLHUurvdlRxo0 by billiglarper@rollenspiel.social
 (DIR) More posts by billiglarper@rollenspiel.social
 (DIR) Post #B6A5ZUqKoRJgLnmCae by vgarzareyna@mstdn.mx
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @quixoticgeek why only 20%?:0
       
 (DIR) Post #B6A6ZY1h4rDsB3g5tQ by mighty_orbot@retro.pizza
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @vgarzareyna Chemical processes, heat loss, photons reflected instead of absorbed, and other laws of physics.  When I was a kid, solar cells topped out around 9% (I did a science project), so today’s 20% conversion is actually really good.
       
 (DIR) Post #B6A6ZYDONMa2lL9R7w by vgarzareyna@mstdn.mx
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mighty_orbot interesting! i thought efficiency was way higher. seems like we have a lot of margin for improvement still (which I think is neat)
       
 (DIR) Post #B6A6g4P3c7xeKViSOm by vgarzareyna@mstdn.mx
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @quixoticgeek that's really cool! thanks for the info. as I mentioned in a different response, i thought efficiency was way higher, but the cool part is we have a lot of margin for improvement
       
 (DIR) Post #B6AKtvLHUurvdlRxo0 by billiglarper@rollenspiel.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @vgarzareyna @quixoticgeek Depends. 😬The theoretical maximum efficiency for a single layer silicon solar cell is about 32%. So getting a 23-24% efficiency isn't bad.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockley%E2%80%93Queisser_limit
       
 (DIR) Post #B6AKtvYkgpe0JXkino by vgarzareyna@mstdn.mx
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @billiglarper @quixoticgeek :0 i guess there's not that much room for improvement then