• Google
    This Blog Web

October 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

RSS Feed

Bookmark and Share

Email Feed

  • Powered by FeedBlitz

« Humble Reasoning | Main | Improvements Over Biology »

October 23, 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I wish them well, but I am not sure that higher efficiency is the right metric to be chasing. Solar panels that cost 1/10 of what the cheapest cost current-technology panels would likely make a substantial difference in the world-wide energy situation over the coming years, even at 5% efficiency whereas panels which have, say, 60% efficiency at the same cost as current day panels would make a relatively negligible difference.


I'd be very skeptical that a DNA based technology could work for solar cells. Sunlight is incredibly energetic and damaging to organic molecules. I wouldn't think that a DNA structure could last long, exposed to direct sunlight.


As I understand it, the DNA merely positions the antenna and the light conversion molecule. Perhaps it could also hold something that would shield it from direct sunlight? Who has info on stability of DNA at different temperatures? Also, if this is a wet process, it may be cheaper to build panels than with silicon. I wish them good fortune.

The comments to this entry are closed.