Comment on If the first solar entrepreneur hadn't been kidnapped, would fossil fuels have dominated the 20th century?

randomaccount43543@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Likey also didn’t contain rare earth minerals - no where near as effective but could have been less damaging and easier to make.

  Then again, could have been a combination of arsenic, asbestos and cocaine so who knows.

  source

  • luthis@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I was too curious:

    Cove’s device was a sort of thermocouple, and thus not based on newly-discovered natural processes or scientific principles. In the patent application the device was described as follows: A thermo-electric battery and appurtenances comprising a block of incombustible, non-conductive material, a series of pairs of elements comprising a plurality of elements formed of an alloy of antinomy and zinc, and a plurality of elements connecting said antinomy and zinc elements, said elements connecting said first-mentioned elements being alternatively of copper and of an alloy of nickel, copper and zinc.

    journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/MCR/…/22231

    source

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      No such thing as too curious… unless you are a cat. Little dangerous there.

      If im reading this correctly, and translated to english:

      • non conductive block

      • two different alloys - zinc and opposite to zinc (antinomy) v copper and nickle/copper/zinc.

      • assuming light hits, produces difference between metal and opposite metal, results in current flow through wire to equalize. Not sure how rare earth Nickle and zinc are, but suppose its not cobalt.

      source

      • CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        So it’s a Seebeck Effect generator and really isn’t what we’d call a solar device today.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • luthis@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Nickel and zinc are very common to my knowledge. And much easier to mine than lithium

        source
    • sj_zero ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Oh, it's just a thermopile put out in the sun.

      I can see why it never caught on then. You'd be relying on the difference in temperature between the hot side of a thing painted black put in the sun and the cool side in the shade. The amount of energy you'd get from such a setup would be infinitecimal. I'd expect you'd need to do an absurd amount of work and use an absurd amount of material just to power a single house.

      The amount of energy it would take to build a "solar cell" thermopile that'd generate 1.5v with a quite high internal resistance would probably be in the megawatt-hours, likely from coal and oil.

      • luthis@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        There were some numbers in one of the links I posted, hopefully that is able to give some solidity to the theory.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What is the typical conversion efficiency of a solar powered thermocouple?

      “Cove presented his second solar electric generator there in 1909. This 1.5m2 panel could produce 45 watts of power and was 2.75% efficient in converting solar energy into electricity.”

      resilience.org/…/how-to-build-a-low-tech-solar-pa…

      source
• PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I want to read more about this, as there is some speculation that the guy may have invented an actual PV panel. Difficult to say without more research… He was also a prolific inventor.

  source