Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cogman10 2623 days ago
I'm pretty skeptical as well that this is useful for really anything. That energy density is so low that I can't think of a single application where either batteries, solar, wind, or some combination of the above wouldn't both work better and be cheaper.

Just to put a little perspective out there, 0.2 mW/m^2 means that 1 square meter of this stuff would take 600 days in ideal production to match the amount of energy stored in one charge of a single rechargeable AA (~3Wh).

1 clear day, plus a tiny solar cell and a AA and you can get 600 operating days of energy really easily.

And here's the thing, if this thing gets buried, it isn't going to generate electricity. So you have to imagine an environment where the snow is constantly melting, you can get a giant sheet of this stuff, and for whatever reason there is no battery chemistry that would work.

You could say "Well, it would make a good snow detector".. but even that it somewhat silly. Because, again, if it gets buried it won't be detecting more snow. So now you need some complex rigging to keep it from collecting snow so it can register that snow is falling. Why not a camera? A weight sensor? etc. Plenty of pretty cheap and low power equipment can do just this without the additional concerns introduced by this piece of tech.

This thing is useless. Maybe interesting to make, definitely not practical for really any application.