What about www.3dsolarproject.com ???
- Thread starter RusWilson
- Start date
Bull#%@! Haha
*********************************
LANDING PAGE IF YOU DONT WANT TO CLICK ON IT.
***************************
100% FREE VIDEO PRESENTATION
Free Video Presentation Reveals MIT-Designed 3D Solar Array Capable Of Generating Up To 20x More Electricity Than Conventional Solar Panels
In This Free Video Presentation You Will See:
How vertically stacking solar panels in this precise zig-zag pattern puts conventional solar panel output to shame.
How over 43,000 people around the World have taken this same design and used it to SLASH their electricity bills and save thousands.
How you can easily build one for yourself in just a couple of hours and with basic household tools, even if you have ZERO previous DIY experience.
*********************************
LANDING PAGE IF YOU DONT WANT TO CLICK ON IT.
***************************
100% FREE VIDEO PRESENTATION
Free Video Presentation Reveals MIT-Designed 3D Solar Array Capable Of Generating Up To 20x More Electricity Than Conventional Solar Panels
In This Free Video Presentation You Will See:
How vertically stacking solar panels in this precise zig-zag pattern puts conventional solar panel output to shame.
How over 43,000 people around the World have taken this same design and used it to SLASH their electricity bills and save thousands.
How you can easily build one for yourself in just a couple of hours and with basic household tools, even if you have ZERO previous DIY experience.
Last edited:
svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
Short Answer: Hoax
Long Answer: Why it's considered a Hoax
The system would generate power, but in general it would generate far less power than a flat 2d array because with today's solar panel technology, panels produce the most energy when they are perpendicularly facing the sun. It would never create more power than a flat fixed array (except possibly at high latitudes with tracking, see long answer 2).
Building upwards confers no advantage to building flat other than reduced space.
Building upwards means the panels above good shade the panels below, so they take in less power.
Panels angled ground-wards or not perpendicular to the sun will never receive as much sun as those perpendicular to the sun.
Long Answer 2: How it might work
First understand You'll never get 20x the power with a 3D array, not even +20%.
The most you could get get is what you would have gotten with a 2D array.
The farther towards the poles you go the lower the sun is in the sky. Let's say you lived at 68° latitude the sun's path through the sky is +/- ~22°, so the yearly elevation of the sun would be between 45° at the height of summer to the horizon (0°) in winter. In which case a vertical structure with the panels at 68° would be just as good at panels on the ground with a 68° tilt. This is because both would on average be perpendicular to the sun. However, it is easier to spin a column, so in that scenario might produce as much as a 2D array with solar tracking for cheaper. The further towards the poles you go, the more effective the system as the shading issue becomes less. @upnorthandpersonal can probably comment on that a lot more.
What about those downward facing panels?
It's hard to imagine a good use case for them, probably better to build a second tower. BUT.... If you had high ground albedo (e.g., always fresh snow on the ground) then panels angled towards the ground would pick up energy reflecting from the ground at a loss.
Long Answer: Why it's considered a Hoax
The system would generate power, but in general it would generate far less power than a flat 2d array because with today's solar panel technology, panels produce the most energy when they are perpendicularly facing the sun. It would never create more power than a flat fixed array (except possibly at high latitudes with tracking, see long answer 2).
Building upwards confers no advantage to building flat other than reduced space.
Building upwards means the panels above good shade the panels below, so they take in less power.
Panels angled ground-wards or not perpendicular to the sun will never receive as much sun as those perpendicular to the sun.
Long Answer 2: How it might work
First understand You'll never get 20x the power with a 3D array, not even +20%.
The most you could get get is what you would have gotten with a 2D array.
The farther towards the poles you go the lower the sun is in the sky. Let's say you lived at 68° latitude the sun's path through the sky is +/- ~22°, so the yearly elevation of the sun would be between 45° at the height of summer to the horizon (0°) in winter. In which case a vertical structure with the panels at 68° would be just as good at panels on the ground with a 68° tilt. This is because both would on average be perpendicular to the sun. However, it is easier to spin a column, so in that scenario might produce as much as a 2D array with solar tracking for cheaper. The further towards the poles you go, the more effective the system as the shading issue becomes less. @upnorthandpersonal can probably comment on that a lot more.
What about those downward facing panels?
It's hard to imagine a good use case for them, probably better to build a second tower. BUT.... If you had high ground albedo (e.g., always fresh snow on the ground) then panels angled towards the ground would pick up energy reflecting from the ground at a loss.
I was bored enough to check it out.
Its Clickbank bullshit.
$1000 for all that valuable info. No wait only $78. Ok just for you its $39 but only if you buy today. Hahahaha..
Oh yeah there was a power blackout and some bad man with a gun somehow broke in coz his porch light was out but was foiled in shooting his 3 year old daughter but shot the genius who is using a fake name to sell ypu a bunch of crap info on solar. Then while he was in the hospital he came up with this brilliant idea to make your electric bill free from those evil power companies. ??????
Damn poke me with sharp sticks instead of being subjected to that horrendously long and agonizing bullcrap sales pitch.
If you cant see through such a manipulative advertising pitch then i worry about your gullibility. Did you buy the $39 Clickbank product?
Last edited:
Similar threads
