โฒ 1054 โผ Obvious choice (lemmy.dbzer0.com) submitted 6 months ago by Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/solarpunk@slrpnk.net 188 comments fedilink hide all child comments ๐ 1
[โ] solo@piefed.social 39 points 6 months ago (4 children) I like the vertically mounted bifacial panels. Highly recommended for areas that get a lot of snow. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [โ] Leax@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (3 children) I had no idea this was a thing! Why isn't this more widespread? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [โ] OrganicMustard@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago It has become a thing in the las 5 years or so. First bifacial modules had to get more popular and overall cost had to go down before it made economic sense to farmers. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] morto@piefed.social 6 points 6 months ago They can't be more widespread. They need to be thin and exactly vertical to optimally work. Sorry, I couldn't resist permalink fedilink source parent [โ] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago Because it can be a pretty steep hit to power output/efficiency compared to angling them to face the sun. Cost per watt is significantly higher this way compared to what you generally see. It allows more sharing of sun between other uses and solar, but it comes at the expense of not letting the solar get as much sun for the same panel cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] Leax@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (3 children) I had no idea this was a thing! Why isn't this more widespread? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [โ] OrganicMustard@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago It has become a thing in the las 5 years or so. First bifacial modules had to get more popular and overall cost had to go down before it made economic sense to farmers. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] morto@piefed.social 6 points 6 months ago They can't be more widespread. They need to be thin and exactly vertical to optimally work. Sorry, I couldn't resist permalink fedilink source parent [โ] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago Because it can be a pretty steep hit to power output/efficiency compared to angling them to face the sun. Cost per watt is significantly higher this way compared to what you generally see. It allows more sharing of sun between other uses and solar, but it comes at the expense of not letting the solar get as much sun for the same panel cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] OrganicMustard@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago It has become a thing in the las 5 years or so. First bifacial modules had to get more popular and overall cost had to go down before it made economic sense to farmers. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] morto@piefed.social 6 points 6 months ago They can't be more widespread. They need to be thin and exactly vertical to optimally work. Sorry, I couldn't resist permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago Because it can be a pretty steep hit to power output/efficiency compared to angling them to face the sun. Cost per watt is significantly higher this way compared to what you generally see. It allows more sharing of sun between other uses and solar, but it comes at the expense of not letting the solar get as much sun for the same panel cost. permalink fedilink source parent