It's true i am the student of Mechanical Engineering (material science and nanotechnology) We just learned in the labs how to make cnts but that wasn't enough To make the cnts you need a sophisticated lab equipment that cost you way more what you think For my branch we are valued when we do the phd in nanoscience department from foreign university Yeah what he said it would take more 20 years is right at 20 year we start productions There are only two types of cnts MWCNTS ANS SWCNTS MWNTS HAVE HIGHER EFFICIENCY THAT SWNTS
Well there increasingly new methods for developing CNTs. The broadly used methods are Arch discharge, laser ablation, Chemical Vapor deposition, ComoCat etc, CNTs are the future. As with every new discovery it takes time for it to get good grounds into the market. As new methods to produce them under cheaper means evolves. CNTs will take over. Just completed my PhD IN chemistry where I researched composites from CNT heterostrucutes. These materials have huge potential
The number of times I have heard that carbon nanotubes are the solution to a problem: 1 milion The number of products I can bay using carbon nanotubes: 0
Check Wikipedia, they are being used, just not (yet) in large scale technical applications, because its still very hard to manufacture them. They are used in microscopes, fighter planes and even Tennis rackets.
blogs.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/files/2018/08/PR_490866_5_Trends_in_the_Emerging_Tech_Hype_Cycle_2018_Hype_Cycle.png You are currently in the first section.
I think people don't realize we use more solar energy than we think. Sun creates heat differences which generates wind, which then are turned into wind power. The sun also evaporates water and create clouds, which gets moved around elsewhere by wind and rain down and creates rivers, which then are turn into hydro power. Of course, geo-thermal is also responsible for the heat, so when we use these renewable energies we're technically using a combination of solar and geo-thermal energies, just more complicated than plain solar panels. It's like the most modern nuclear reactors are actually just a super complicated water kettle. Also, this is about the 900000th time over more than 10 years that I saw carbon nanotubes or graphite is going to change the entire world blah blah, yet not a single actual product is made. The awe factor is seriously undermined to the point that this video is pretty much just "oh, great, another one of these. sure. "
Well, you have a pretty wide definition of solar energy . And yeah, it's really hard to make carbon nanotubes in a commercial scale, so we (consumers) aren't going to see them anytime soon.
@@jorgealexandre4616 its been really hard for 10 years and its not got easier. and also thats not a wide definition of solar power, its technically correct lol
I say we use peltier plates to generate electricity from the heat made by the solar panels and to cool our homes make use of the access energy with something that actually already exists and only cost a few cents per module...
Noob here, I have a question. Where do the knocked out electrons come from? I mean if fhey are knocked out of the material the amount should be very limited?
Yes, but the electrons aren't just kicked off, as the silicon layer looses electrons, it charges positively, attracting electrons from the other side of the circuit, think then of a person bouncing a baseball against a wall, and cathing it when it falls back
It is time to use the UA-cam comments section for clarification: when she says "(solar radiation) that couldn't be absorbed by the solar panels was bouncing off as heat" is she talking about heat generated by the absorption of wavelenghts that do not have a photoelectric effect on the material but do get absorbed, and so increase the thermal energy of the system? Or is she talking about blackbody radiation and the wavelengths generated through that? Do the nanotubes emit blackbody radiation at the wavelength used by the semiconductor? I'm most definitely missing something here. Captain (Scientifically) Obvious, come to my rescue!
Did I blink while the explanation of how carbon nanotubes convert heat into light - that is, turn broadband photons into narrowband photons - was given? The PM article linked to in the description also fails to mention how this is done.
question title is the safest way to assume something that isn't verified yet, since no one can blame you if it's right or wrong, which also make them able to pump more news....but there is a video in YT which explain that the answer to such title is most likely ......no
Whenever we add maybe or something like that. Then we can literally make any claim. I just want to see more videos of assertive and definitive technological advancement which is soon going to be in market.
Three things come into my mind immediately: 1. How are you making sure all the wasted heat is transferred to the nanotube? 2. How is it possible to turn heat into photon that efficiently? (29% to 80%, this is violation of thermodynamics! Can you stop those garbage claims?) 3. How can you make sure all the photon regenerated can be effectively guided back to the grid?
cause no one wants to deal with the waste, we dont have many proper places to put it america already has problems with nuclear waste and as far as we can tell it causes health problems to some nearby residents there isnt any single golden bullet to clean energy, they all have flaws we just have to pick the ones with flaws we can manage best no one likes having to say "u cant touch this for 400 years" 👀 im actually looking forward to tidal energy research, recent developments have made it seem practical in many locations while being very predictable most major cities live near large bodies of water so i think good tidal could help alot but it has had problems in the past, so its still being tested
@@YagamiKou "cause no one wants to deal with the waste, we don't have many proper places to put it" So, it's better to dump our waste CO2 into the atmosphere, right? There is MUCH LESS waste from nuclear than there is from burning fossil fuels. Until we have fusion, fission reactors are a viable way to generate electricity.
Recent research has shown that nanotubes could be the answer to making Super capacitors viable for portable device. An experiment was done in Japan that showed they have the potential to have over 10X the energy density of modern batteries.
ZedTaku i have no idea what you think you read, but that is not the case at all. There are a lot of things that graphene almost teases us with. From solving all our water issues to allowing for impossibly high density batteries or even room temperature superconductors, graphene almost teases us with what could be
I wrote a research paper on this in 2016. Issue is finding a way to coat solar cells in an economically and physically efficient manner with these nanotubes.
Speaking of wasted light... there was a distinct green cast coming off the anti-reflective coating of your glasses. I have not noticed this in prior videos so I wonder if the lighting setup might have been moved to be more "in your face" than before.
This video made me curious. What is the albedo of a solar panel compared to the albedo of the surface it is typically placed over? This may be a non-question. The incident infrared energy is trapped in the atmosphere whether it is first absorbed by an object or not. The solar panel has little effect on the albedo whether it reflects the infrared, absorbs the infrared as heat or produces electricity from it. The incident energy of the UV spectrum is relatively small so the characteristics of the solar panel compared to the surface beneath it is probably immaterial. The first answer to my question is that the solar panel is not impacting the albedo, so panel the world. We've got lots of sand. So far as boosting the efficiency of the existing solar panels I can see merit in that, as well. My wife and I own a home that we heat primarily with a mini-split heat pump, and we charge an EV. We have max'd out the roof with solar panels and are still required to purchase a fair percentage of our electricity from the grid. Solar panels that are even 25% efficient would be more than enough to make us net zero in consumption. We could also probably afford to heat our house a bit more than we do. I started writing this an hour or so ago and pessimistic that there was great value in increasing the efficiency of a solar panel unless it reduced the cost per kilowatt. My own situation shows that it could be worth a small premium. For mobile applications, of course, it would be worth a substantially higher premium. Now where are those mobile applications?
cant we use solar panels with cooling channels as a pre stage for a regular steam powered generator? or something like a mixture of photovoltaic and solar heating for homes to cool solar panels while storing warm water?
There is a company in Colorado that is building a plant to manufacture a solar panel that uses Nanotube Technology and Graphene. I have seen the plant and they are definitely putting it together. The panel is going to be 12" by 18" and can out produce a 6' by 4' silicon panel. Nanotech Engineering Inc. I just saw the plant but they are serious, with serious machines.
The best looking mouth in all of Seeker.... Oh, and this is great news too... If only they could find a way to produce nanotubes cost efficiently, we would have near indestructible material for so many industries, least not being solar panels, and Space elevators.
considering that most commercially available solar panels only are around 20% efficient, ANY improvements will have a positive impact on what already is a feasible energy solution for some. Looking forward to increased power output, with a smaller footprint!
If you paint the panels in vantablack, would you be able to use the light absorbed by the dark surface or will the vantablack just absorb the energy like a black hole?
Black surfaces are black because they absorb all light (or nearly all) light in the visible spectrum. If the panels were covered in vantablack, the vantablack would absorb the light and none would reach the solar panel, making the panel useless. The semiconductor in the panels must do the absorbing.
I wonder about combing this with transparent aluminum? It is roughly as hard as sapphire, good light transmission, and the roughly the same thermal transmission properties of regular aluminum. A scratch resistant, strong, thermal resistant panel sounds like a winner to me. While transparent aluminum is expensive now, the same old answers apply. Mass production makes things cost effective.
I getting "burned" out on hearing about Nano Tube's. Been watching videos and reading about then for 10+ years. It's about time they are used for something...
Which is more efficient? Solar panel farm style. Or Mirror arrays with a center tower focusing all light and EMR to use both light and the immense heat that focuses near the top?
If the 80% target is actually reached, it would need to be complemented by an accessible market price and an effective and cost effective electricity storage solution. The sun does not shine throughout the day or throughout the year, so energy buffering is need. The beauty of such system (if they eventually make it to the mass market) is that they could potentially disconnect low storey houses from the power grid. I'm not sure this would be a practical solution for high rise.
The reasearcher can use Vantablack as it totally absorbs the Light thus the Heat from that can be changed into Thermal generator. It's like boiling Water with the film of Banta black and running the turbine on the process. This can easily upgrade existing Coal Thermal Plants to Solar Farma
The problem with surface based solar arrays is clouds, angle of the sun in different seasons, snow and rain and such. Space based solar arrays beaming power down is the only way for solar to ever be more than a novelty for most.
Check out what we googled today - we are now certified to teach and lecture you with our over recycled stock footage because we lack insight intuition and creativity to god forbid use it on anything relevant in 2019..
@@thekaxmax It is not. Both because it's not new info, we've known this for years, and because carbon nanotubes are the wonder material that has been promised but never delivered. This is practically like saying fusion is the solution to climate change. Sure, in theory, But in practice it'll be decades before these technologies make it to market.
Mr. Person Humanson this was basicly just published. For this to be implemented on a large scale, the production of carbon nanptubes also have to improve. So assuming this will happen, then these mega-efficient solar panels will also be a reality. Probably implemented in space tech first.
Gallium arsenide and graphene are much more efficient, can use more infrared which is always available. These material camera sensors are also more sensitive.
I don't need 80% , 40% changes everything , 40% makes it practical to put solar cells on vans and buses - in the summer you might get an extra 30 miles of charge from the sun .
Our company IQ materials can not make carbon nanotubes from 12 inches in width to 3 ft and 20ft to 200 ft in a day. Thickness: 5-15 microns Aerial density: 5-15 g/m2 or GSM Conductivity: ~200 S/cm Tensile Strength: 40-60 MPa Tensile modulus: 2-3 GPa Density: 0.3-0.4 g/cm3 Temp. Resistance: 1900c Width: 6 in or 12 in with typical 20, 50, 100 or 200 ft length
@@howardsmith9342 That's what Pup314 is saying. Suck the excess carbon dioxide out of the air, turn it into nanotubes. I don't know if it could be done at a large enough scale to make a difference, but the basic idea seems sound to me. Well worth trying.
@@craigcorson3036 I don't know if it could be done, ever. Name one product that is manufactured out of thin air, that isn't a gas. Just one. I'd bet most if not all of that carbon would come from something like coal (a fossil fuel that would cease to be mined if some people get their way.) I wish they would get it out if the air, but there is no way to do it economically at present.
I am wondering if this has anything to do with nanoanntenias that we were hearing about from the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory about 10 years ago? What happened with that?
Turning that thermal energy into useable energy is easy and doesn't require something as far fetched as carbon nanotubes. It only requires a sterling motor (look it up), a generator, some water, and some copper tubing.
A solar energy business in my city was recently forced to shut down
...
Turns out the entire operation was shady.
Pretty much any type of business can be shady by hiding their real activity. Example:Mafia owning restaurants/casinos.
Punny...
@@justaknight4719 r/woooosh
Ba dum, tss
r/puns
Hopefully the next video will be about how the process of making Carbon Nanotubes has been simplified making them suitable for mass production.
I hope not, because if it is, the next video is "only" 20 years away 😐...
It's true i am the student of Mechanical Engineering (material science and nanotechnology)
We just learned in the labs how to make cnts but that wasn't enough
To make the cnts you need a sophisticated lab equipment that cost you way more what you think
For my branch we are valued when we do the phd in nanoscience department from foreign university
Yeah what he said it would take more 20 years is right at 20 year we start productions
There are only two types of cnts MWCNTS ANS SWCNTS
MWNTS HAVE HIGHER EFFICIENCY THAT SWNTS
@@mdashwaq257 20 years? Sounds like a bunch of cunts not CNTS.
Well there increasingly new methods for developing CNTs. The broadly used methods are Arch discharge, laser ablation, Chemical Vapor deposition, ComoCat etc, CNTs are the future. As with every new discovery it takes time for it to get good grounds into the market. As new methods to produce them under cheaper means evolves. CNTs will take over. Just completed my PhD IN chemistry where I researched composites from CNT heterostrucutes. These materials have huge potential
@@mdashwaq257 hello Mr nano engineer have you heard about hemp based carbon nano sheets? Real cheap
The number of times I have heard that carbon nanotubes are the solution to a problem: 1 milion
The number of products I can bay using carbon nanotubes: 0
The number of times i read a comment : 9958435376536547334564373737374633763
The number of times i liked a comment : 1
Check Wikipedia, they are being used, just not (yet) in large scale technical applications, because its still very hard to manufacture them.
They are used in microscopes, fighter planes and even Tennis rackets.
they are really hard to make, they make it in a lab in really small amount, we need a material engineer genius to unlock its production
"It might" Yes ok Seeker...
blogs.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/files/2018/08/PR_490866_5_Trends_in_the_Emerging_Tech_Hype_Cycle_2018_Hype_Cycle.png
You are currently in the first section.
I think people don't realize we use more solar energy than we think.
Sun creates heat differences which generates wind, which then are turned into wind power. The sun also evaporates water and create clouds, which gets moved around elsewhere by wind and rain down and creates rivers, which then are turn into hydro power. Of course, geo-thermal is also responsible for the heat, so when we use these renewable energies we're technically using a combination of solar and geo-thermal energies, just more complicated than plain solar panels. It's like the most modern nuclear reactors are actually just a super complicated water kettle.
Also, this is about the 900000th time over more than 10 years that I saw carbon nanotubes or graphite is going to change the entire world blah blah, yet not a single actual product is made. The awe factor is seriously undermined to the point that this video is pretty much just "oh, great, another one of these. sure. "
Well, you have a pretty wide definition of solar energy . And yeah, it's really hard to make carbon nanotubes in a commercial scale, so we (consumers) aren't going to see them anytime soon.
@@jorgealexandre4616 its been really hard for 10 years and its not got easier. and also thats not a wide definition of solar power, its technically correct lol
Yea also the sun let life begin therefor fossil fuels are solar energy
Photosolar perhaps.. Which doesn't include thermal solar and other form of energy derived directly & indirectly from the sun..
Also, geo-thermal is *mostly* just friction of different density materials in the core and mantle due to sun's gravity, so yet again it is solar :)
Carbon nanotubes and graphene have been the solution for everything for decades now.
The way those nanotubes turn broad band into a narrow spectrum is the same sort of process that makes a butterfly blue.
80?! I've literally sprayed my drinks on the screen. holy humus.
Woah! I just started researching this and you guys posted the video! Perfect!
Great video. They might also be the secret boost to reach *90% the speed of light.* It is called "NanoFET technology".
Lol, wut?
I say we use peltier plates to generate electricity from the heat made by the solar panels and to cool our homes make use of the access energy with something that actually already exists and only cost a few cents per module...
Excellent Video . . . Thank You ! ! !
Yes more carbon nanotubes, Riley from LTT is Happy ❤️
@nikola zazzoslki lol Anthony should try to explain this with Riley 🤣
He is a guy who is crazy about carbon nanotubes
Noob here, I have a question.
Where do the knocked out electrons come from?
I mean if fhey are knocked out of the material the amount should be very limited?
Yes, but the electrons aren't just kicked off, as the silicon layer looses electrons, it charges positively, attracting electrons from the other side of the circuit, think then of a person bouncing a baseball against a wall, and cathing it when it falls back
@@Biomechanoid29ah thank you soooo much I was confused too😁
This video made me want to go play factorio and set up some solar power
Very interesting !
I love that there so many people smarter than that can make things us dummies can still use. Thanks for making our dumb lives better!
Tbh i love this channel I find myself watching every video whenever it comes out. Never fails to intrigue me.
It is time to use the UA-cam comments section for clarification: when she says "(solar radiation) that couldn't be absorbed by the solar panels was bouncing off as heat" is she talking about heat generated by the absorption of wavelenghts that do not have a photoelectric effect on the material but do get absorbed, and so increase the thermal energy of the system? Or is she talking about blackbody radiation and the wavelengths generated through that? Do the nanotubes emit blackbody radiation at the wavelength used by the semiconductor? I'm most definitely missing something here. Captain (Scientifically) Obvious, come to my rescue!
It might... thanks Seeker.
when do you think that this will be available on the open market
Seeker videos never disappoint!
i feel like we knew this in 2011 and nanotubes are still not viable
Excellent news. I congratulate the Rice University researchers on their innovativeness.
thanks for the content!
Did I blink while the explanation of how carbon nanotubes convert heat into light - that is, turn broadband photons into narrowband photons - was given? The PM article linked to in the description also fails to mention how this is done.
Look up thermophotovoltaics.
great development..
Yes love from korea
as someone that has been researching residential-scale solar for a few months to make future plans possible, this is exciting news!
When will we get out of videos having term " maybe" or "might be".
question title is the safest way to assume something that isn't verified yet, since no one can blame you if it's right or wrong, which also make them able to pump more news....but there is a video in YT which explain that the answer to such title is most likely ......no
I guess it is easier to defend a point of view when you say maybe or might in a video...
Whenever we add maybe or something like that. Then we can literally make any claim.
I just want to see more videos of assertive and definitive technological advancement which is soon going to be in market.
Finally some good news on the internet
Three things come into my mind immediately:
1. How are you making sure all the wasted heat is transferred to the nanotube?
2. How is it possible to turn heat into photon that efficiently? (29% to 80%, this is violation of thermodynamics! Can you stop those garbage claims?)
3. How can you make sure all the photon regenerated can be effectively guided back to the grid?
Very interesting idea
Why does literally nobody with any influence talk about nuclear?
Ignorant fear.
cause no one wants to deal with the waste, we dont have many proper places to put it
america already has problems with nuclear waste and as far as we can tell it causes health problems to some nearby residents
there isnt any single golden bullet to clean energy, they all have flaws we just have to pick the ones with flaws we can manage best
no one likes having to say "u cant touch this for 400 years" 👀
im actually looking forward to tidal energy research, recent developments have made it seem practical in many locations while being very predictable
most major cities live near large bodies of water so i think good tidal could help alot
but it has had problems in the past, so its still being tested
@@YagamiKou "cause no one wants to deal with the waste, we don't have many proper places to put it"
So, it's better to dump our waste CO2 into the atmosphere, right? There is MUCH LESS waste from nuclear than there is from burning fossil fuels. Until we have fusion, fission reactors are a viable way to generate electricity.
Vox news has one on Nuclear, talk about new design on Reactors, and make it energy efficient, and less waste.
Or thorium reactors....
I’ve never once seen a serious or even remotely helpful comment on this channels videos
Keep us updated next year, can't wait to see what comes from this!
I live in South Africa. Perfect for solar energy, yet we don't adopt it that much.... As always much love to you Seeker and Maren.
Perhaps because it's not as economically viable as other sources.
The way Maren narrates is music to my ears.
They are the answer to everything, carbon nanotubes
Even my failing marriage?
Recent research has shown that nanotubes could be the answer to making Super capacitors viable for portable device. An experiment was done in Japan that showed they have the potential to have over 10X the energy density of modern batteries.
Well presented, as always, Maren.
Can existing solar panels be retro fitted with nano tubes?
Oh my. Another solution given to us by graphene and carbon nanotubes.
Sounds like you find science boring.
ZedTaku i have no idea what you think you read, but that is not the case at all. There are a lot of things that graphene almost teases us with. From solving all our water issues to allowing for impossibly high density batteries or even room temperature superconductors, graphene almost teases us with what could be
Wonder if you could use a magnifying glass on to solour pannles
Is this material efficient to produce? What is the costs? etc.
We at Freevolt are using Graphene in our panels and seeing amazing results!
They are at 46% now.
Big news Thank You.
Nanotube son. Its always nanotube
Watch big oil shut it down
29% isn't that bad, compared to photosynthesis.
Yup, 10 percent law
Especially if existing panels price can be dropped dramatically
Yes and no.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/plants-versus-photovoltaics-at-capturing-sunlight/
i've seen carbon nanotubes as solutions for like every application, its remarkable
Yea carbon nanotubes is miracle! But we won't see any real product until.. 2030? or even more.
its like fusion. always 30 years away.
Immortality in 2050 nanobots super ai biological etc
@@donnabrahamworsley5857 super intelligent ai is probably gonna happen by the 2060s and everything u said and more will exist then
@@BMac420 YES
@@BMac420 Y E S
Where did you get that 29% efficiency number. I last heard the record was around 40%.
heat can make power too
Definitely the product of the future "and always will be!"
Dam thats good
So with the panels glow as nanotubes produce light?
You could also install piping in the solar panels and then use the heat to run a sterling engine.
At a glance I thought the thumbnail was the Fear Inoculum album cover. Lol.
Which software do you use for infography and graphics?
I wrote a research paper on this in 2016. Issue is finding a way to coat solar cells in an economically and physically efficient manner with these nanotubes.
Perhaps by involving additive manufacturing it might be possible.
Speaking of wasted light... there was a distinct green cast coming off the anti-reflective coating of your glasses. I have not noticed this in prior videos so I wonder if the lighting setup might have been moved to be more "in your face" than before.
You want to know how old this idea is? About 20 years.
Super conductive materials have long been the goal of energy production and storage.
Great vedio
I literally wrote this down in my notes 1-2 years ago
Brain & Beauty
How about graphene?
This video made me curious. What is the albedo of a solar panel compared to the albedo of the surface it is typically placed over? This may be a non-question.
The incident infrared energy is trapped in the atmosphere whether it is first absorbed by an object or not. The solar panel has little effect on the albedo whether it reflects the infrared, absorbs the infrared as heat or produces electricity from it. The incident energy of the UV spectrum is relatively small so the characteristics of the solar panel compared to the surface beneath it is probably immaterial. The first answer to my question is that the solar panel is not impacting the albedo, so panel the world. We've got lots of sand.
So far as boosting the efficiency of the existing solar panels I can see merit in that, as well. My wife and I own a home that we heat primarily with a mini-split heat pump, and we charge an EV. We have max'd out the roof with solar panels and are still required to purchase a fair percentage of our electricity from the grid. Solar panels that are even 25% efficient would be more than enough to make us net zero in consumption. We could also probably afford to heat our house a bit more than we do.
I started writing this an hour or so ago and pessimistic that there was great value in increasing the efficiency of a solar panel unless it reduced the cost per kilowatt. My own situation shows that it could be worth a small premium. For mobile applications, of course, it would be worth a substantially higher premium. Now where are those mobile applications?
cant we use solar panels with cooling channels as a pre stage for a regular steam powered generator?
or something like a mixture of photovoltaic and solar heating for homes to cool solar panels while storing warm water?
There is a company in Colorado that is building a plant to manufacture a solar panel that uses Nanotube Technology and Graphene. I have seen the plant and they are definitely putting it together. The panel is going to be 12" by 18" and can out produce a 6' by 4' silicon panel. Nanotech Engineering Inc. I just saw the plant but they are serious, with serious machines.
The best looking mouth in all of Seeker.... Oh, and this is great news too... If only they could find a way to produce nanotubes cost efficiently, we would have near indestructible material for so many industries, least not being solar panels, and Space elevators.
off topic, one question : what is the gradient used for her background?.. why its so kind of mint effect?.
Solar panels definitely do their jobs. The main issue is we have nowhere to store all the excess energy being produced when it's not being used.
considering that most commercially available solar panels only are around 20% efficient, ANY improvements will have a positive impact on what already is a feasible energy solution for some. Looking forward to increased power output, with a smaller footprint!
If you paint the panels in vantablack, would you be able to use the light absorbed by the dark surface or will the vantablack just absorb the energy like a black hole?
Black surfaces are black because they absorb all light (or nearly all) light in the visible spectrum. If the panels were covered in vantablack, the vantablack would absorb the light and none would reach the solar panel, making the panel useless. The semiconductor in the panels must do the absorbing.
Excellent! Thx
I wonder about combing this with transparent aluminum? It is roughly as hard as sapphire, good light transmission, and the roughly the same thermal transmission properties of regular aluminum. A scratch resistant, strong, thermal resistant panel sounds like a winner to me. While transparent aluminum is expensive now, the same old answers apply. Mass production makes things cost effective.
It's only a matter of time before we can effectively harness the sun's energy.
dyson swarm anyone?
@@BMac420 we are far from a Dyson sphere but man, that would be an amazing feat.
@@mamaharumi ik but it would be sweet
What about Wind turbines? Any news for them, innovations or more efficient? Or hydropower with waves?
with nanotubular vanes that spin even when theres no wind!!
Could you do a video on the new cheap $500 LIDAR?
Graphene and carbon nanotubes have been promising a lot for a long time. They're like kids with hidden talent that doesn't easily surface.
I getting "burned" out on hearing about Nano Tube's. Been watching videos and reading about then for 10+ years. It's about time they are used for something...
Which is more efficient?
Solar panel farm style.
Or Mirror arrays with a center tower focusing all light and EMR to use both light and the immense heat that focuses near the top?
Yeah! science!
NOW CAN WE MAKE THE WHOLE BODY OF A CAR OUT OF NANITUBE SOLAR PANELS???? WHATS TAKING SO LONG......
yes 80percent efficacy means will work well on the car roof....lets buy some clear straws and test them out...
If the 80% target is actually reached, it would need to be complemented by an accessible market price and an effective and cost effective electricity storage solution. The sun does not shine throughout the day or throughout the year, so energy buffering is need. The beauty of such system (if they eventually make it to the mass market) is that they could potentially disconnect low storey houses from the power grid. I'm not sure this would be a practical solution for high rise.
The reasearcher can use Vantablack as it totally absorbs the Light thus the Heat from that can be changed into Thermal generator. It's like boiling Water with the film of Banta black and running the turbine on the process. This can easily upgrade existing Coal Thermal Plants to Solar Farma
The problem with surface based solar arrays is clouds, angle of the sun in different seasons, snow and rain and such. Space based solar arrays beaming power down is the only way for solar to ever be more than a novelty for most.
Check out what we googled today - we are now certified to teach and lecture you with our over recycled stock footage because we lack insight intuition and creativity to god forbid use it on anything relevant in 2019..
This isn't relevant?
@@thekaxmax It is not. Both because it's not new info, we've known this for years, and because carbon nanotubes are the wonder material that has been promised but never delivered. This is practically like saying fusion is the solution to climate change. Sure, in theory, But in practice it'll be decades before these technologies make it to market.
Like all the new technologies featured in this channel:
When is it going to be mass produced? and Will I still be alive when that happen?
Mr. Person Humanson this was basicly just published.
For this to be implemented on a large scale, the production of carbon nanptubes also have to improve.
So assuming this will happen, then these mega-efficient solar panels will also be a reality. Probably implemented in space tech first.
@@Vulcano7965 you are correct friend
Gallium arsenide and graphene are much more efficient, can use more infrared which is always available. These material camera sensors are also more sensitive.
Great idea. Could be a game changer?
I don't need 80% , 40% changes everything , 40% makes it practical to put solar cells on vans and buses - in the summer you might get an extra 30 miles of charge from the sun .
Just another cool technology that will possibly never be commercially viable
like solar panels? (ironic)
Francesco Rizzo exactly
People always say new technology will never become commercial viable until it does people never learn
@@ONDANOTA thing is, solar panels aren't. Heavy subsidizing is the only thing keeping most solar parks afloat, at least here in Europe.
@@off_Planet I will wait until nct panels are available and make big money$$$
this is great,but if it takes so long to put them on the market,we can never bennefit from this technology
Our company IQ materials can not make carbon nanotubes from 12 inches in width to 3 ft and 20ft to 200 ft in a day.
Thickness: 5-15 microns
Aerial density: 5-15 g/m2 or GSM
Conductivity: ~200 S/cm
Tensile Strength: 40-60 MPa
Tensile modulus: 2-3 GPa
Density: 0.3-0.4 g/cm3
Temp. Resistance: 1900c
Width: 6 in or 12 in with typical 20, 50, 100 or 200 ft length
If we make enough solar panels we can used up that excess carbon as well as lowering CO2 emission by not using fossil fuels.
U said it pal
All we need to do is figure how to make carbon nanotubes out of air, and we can solve both problems at once.
@@howardsmith9342 That's what Pup314 is saying. Suck the excess carbon dioxide out of the air, turn it into nanotubes. I don't know if it could be done at a large enough scale to make a difference, but the basic idea seems sound to me. Well worth trying.
What primitive thinking...
@@craigcorson3036 I don't know if it could be done, ever. Name one product that is manufactured out of thin air, that isn't a gas. Just one. I'd bet most if not all of that carbon would come from something like coal (a fossil fuel that would cease to be mined if some people get their way.) I wish they would get it out if the air, but there is no way to do it economically at present.
I am wondering if this has anything to do with nanoanntenias that we were hearing about from the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory about 10 years ago? What happened with that?
Turning that thermal energy into useable energy is easy and doesn't require something as far fetched as carbon nanotubes. It only requires a sterling motor (look it up), a generator, some water, and some copper tubing.
I would love to see reports on smart homes for energy efficiency
Make a vid on Acoustic Meta-materials as well.