[QUOTE=xilman;465661]Another nice example: it is well-known and widely accepted that the pope is a Catholic and bears shit in the woods. I ask you, has anyone any evidence whatsoever for the pope bearing shit in the woods?[/QUOTE]I hadn't heard it described like that before. I thought it was bears that were Catholic and the pope that shits in the wood. I must have been misled all this time.

[url]https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/why-novatis-apos-475k-car-191007313.html[/url]

[url]http://allrgb.com/[/url]

Scientists recently discovered the optimal color for solar panels to generate maximum energy from photons. Guess what color is optimal?

Chlorophyll green. No lie. I'm not saying that I already knew, but, dear god, millions must've been spent on the research.

Can't you picture the scientists going on long walks, staring at trees and grass, pondering what the optimal color could possibly be?

And now I can't find the article...Should've posted when I first read it. Finding a lot of stuff about blue and black solar panels, I guess from old articles.

[url]https://cleantechnica.com/2016/12/01/plants-green-us-air-force-behind-new-solar-cell-research-breakthrough/[/url]

[QUOTE=jasong;466807]Scientists recently discovered the optimal color for solar panels to generate maximum energy from photons. Guess what color is optimal?

Chlorophyll green.[/QUOTE]I find that surprising. Why would they want to reflect the green light (and thus waste it) instead of absorbing it and convert it to electricity? Having no reflection, i.e. a black surface, would provide more opportunity to convert photons into moving electrons.

[QUOTE=retina;466808]I find that surprising. Why would they want to reflect the green light (and thus waste it) instead of absorbing it and convert it to electricity? Having no reflection, i.e. a black surface, would provide more opportunity to convert photons into moving electrons.[/QUOTE]
Whether one believes in blind evolution or intelligent design, I think it's a mistake to poopoo the solution mother nature came up with. We might have "better" ways, but the chlorophyll-type route is probably the most optimized and sustainable.

[QUOTE=jasong;466810]Whether one believes in blind evolution or intelligent design, I think it's a mistake to poopoo the solution mother nature came up with. We might have "better" ways, but the chlorophyll-type route is probably the most optimized and sustainable.[/QUOTE]But if the goals are different then it is also a mistake to blindly follow nature as the one true guiding solution. If the goals are aligned then for sure nature has some very good solutions, and ignoring them would be foolish. But nature has some poor solutions also, for example the wheel is great for long distance travel but nature never figured out that one.

So the question comes down to "are the goals aligned here?" From the article it appears as though the goal was not to maximise conversion, but to minimise difficulties with supporting hardware. Actually I'm not entirely sure my parsing is correct because the article is very vague.

[QUOTE=retina;466808]I find that surprising. Why would they want to reflect the green light (and thus waste it) instead of absorbing it and convert it to electricity? Having no reflection, i.e. a black surface, would provide more opportunity to convert photons into moving electrons.[/QUOTE]

first thought after a cursory search on wavelength is maybe it's it the wrong part of the spectrum of wavelength to work ?

[QUOTE=jasong;466810]Whether one believes in blind evolution or intelligent design, I think it's a mistake to poopoo the solution mother nature came up with. We might have "better" ways, but the chlorophyll-type route is probably the most optimized and sustainable.[/QUOTE]

As one who is actively involved in solar energy and solar cell research, you're both right and wrong. Chlorophyll-type routes are optimized, but for sustainability/longevity, not efficiency.

The maximum efficiency is obtained by absorbing most of the visible spectrum (and ideally infrared too, though there's issues there). Silicon, which starts absorbing at around 1000 nm, has efficiencies ranging from 15-25%, but oxidizes very easily without protection. The newest type of solar cell, lead halide perovskites, have already proven to be 15-20% efficient, but not on commercial scales yet.

Chlorophyll's route is something like 1% efficient. So the question is: can we get chlorophyll's stability while increasing the efficiency.

In short, it's not a "no duh" answer as you seem to think. There's also the matter that chlorophyll by itself very quickly dies off, as there are several exactly aligned pieces of the photosynthetic pathway. Further, we only recently got a good feel for what the pieces were and how they actually go together.

TL;DR: Yeah, green is an obvious choice, but it's not necessarily the actual best, and it's important to understand WHY plants ended up there.


Edit: With all that said, the actual article looks interesting, and I think I'll be reading it tomorrow.

Mocking Trump, this Michigan mayor was just impeached after banning 'heterosexuals'
 

[URL]https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/8/31/1694865/-This-mayor-was-impeached-for-banning-heterosexuals-He-was-inspired-by-Trump[/URL]
[QUOTE]His mayoral proclamation explains that when he was growing up, he was often told that homosexuals would go to hell. But “now the heterosexuals are trying to take that from us too,” Daniel wrote.

Lest he seem bigoted, Daniel offered local heterosexuals a chance to stay in Hell for a price: Fork over $84,000, which they would get back after one year of abstinence from straight sex.

“Reparative therapy” to find one’s gay side was also to be strongly encouraged. The alternative: being forced to wear a scarlet H and cargo shorts in the town square every morning for some public straight-shaming.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=wombatman;466814]Chlorophyll's route is something like 1% efficient.[/QUOTE]

Wikipedia [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetic_efficiency]says 3-6%[/url].