If you had 10 million to donate to Tulsa...

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar
Interesting idea.  
The roof of the QT Center with it's pitch is 477,204 sq.ft.  

You can get 26,511 standard BP 24V 175W solar panels on that surface.

I would go for the newer Sharp 224 watt panels

The cost would be $31,680,645 without installation wiring or any electrical conversion equipment.  

You would have to grid-tie-inverters to match the power to AC and insure grid sine wave compatibility, so I'd add an additional $8 to $10 million to the cost.  

These would be about $30 million for everything...http://www.mrsolar.com/pdf/sharp/Sharp224.pdf

I would estimate installation and hardware at around $15.9 million.

May have to reinforce the roof of the building because the weight exceeds a million pounds in panels, wiring, and hardware (901,374 lbs for just the panels at 34 lbs each).

The ones I like are about 44 pounds a piece, but are rated at 13.74% efficiency...

 It certainly wouldn't be able to supply all of the power that the QT center needs, but it may be able to provide a percentage on very sunny days, and could certainly provide most of the power during non-event times on sunny days.

Comes out to about $55 to $60 mill.

I think we could do it for less, but maybe they way government bids things you are closer.

We should try this...

Never seen them on a bid, so I don't know much about Sharp.  They would boost power output slightly but we still have the problem of being in Oklahoma.

Photovoltaic cells stop working at about 180F to 200F, and drop charge as the temperature increases.  So on a hot summer day you will have a roof temperature of around 160F to 170F, meaning that you may gain less than 1% efficiency.  They are usually tested and rated at 70F, so only if we had long 70 degree summer days you could get close to a 10% to 15% efficiency rating.

The only incentive for solar at this technology level is the tax incentives.  If you are a homeowner you can get around $2,000 a year.  I'm not sure what businesses get, as that we've never had one follow through after they understand the technology.

Many new home owners and businesses purchase the standard kits from Home Depot so that they can get the tax credit and in some cases the marketing advantages.  Unless you have a 24 volt home, with few appliances, and store the energy (illegal in Oklahoma) solar technology has no advantage outside of marketing and tax credits.  

If it's strictly an environmental standpoint that you are going for with the QT center, then putting a Geothermal exchange system under the parking lot with 60 to 70 wells and cutting new skylights in the roof of the EXPO would be less expensive, provide more light energy and all of the cooling and heat exchange necessary for the center.  It would also have a significantly lower maintenance cost and eventually pay for itself.

Until we perfect the silicon ribbon system or find a different way of converting solar energy at a higher efficiency rate, solar is simply a scientific goal.  

While I agree with your analysis, it would seem proper to confine your last statement to 'photovoltaic' energy, not 'solar' in general.

I can agree with that. []

I'd like to see some advances in solar steam and solar-thermal-exchange, but it seems that no one is really that interested in developing either one beyond their current applications.  Surface-mass/KW ratios I suppose.