Talk:Solar Combined Heat Power System: Difference between revisions
(The efficiency of 34% is highly exaggerated) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
For a prototype, I will give you all the quality credit if you can get 5% global heat-to-electricity efficiency. | For a prototype, I will give you all the quality credit if you can get 5% global heat-to-electricity efficiency. | ||
Also, the collector efficiency estimation is too optimistic. There are also mirror reflectivity loss (15%), interception factor loss (depending on the optical precision), endloss (depending on geometry and orientation), cosine loss (depending on orientation and location). You will get bad surprises when you realise the project! | |||
[[User:Azuredu|Azuredu]] | |||
Revision as of 14:37, 20 February 2009
The efficiency computation is completely wrong!
Claiming 90% turbine efficiency will completely discredit the project in the eyes of experts. What about Carnot efficiency? What is the working temperature?
From real engineering computations and what I know about Tesla turbines, you will be happy if you can get 10% heat-to-mechanical work efficiency. Anyway, don't expect much more than that for small installations.
For a prototype, I will give you all the quality credit if you can get 5% global heat-to-electricity efficiency.
Also, the collector efficiency estimation is too optimistic. There are also mirror reflectivity loss (15%), interception factor loss (depending on the optical precision), endloss (depending on geometry and orientation), cosine loss (depending on orientation and location). You will get bad surprises when you realise the project!