• Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s 95% of regular panels, so it’s 5% worse.

      I would go with regular panels in that case, unless they are shaped like tiles and can provide better coverage of the roof. 5% efficiency drop but 15% coverage increase could be worth it. But I expect install costs would be quite a bit higher

    • Thorry@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The tiles mentioned are still around 20%, the headline is just misleading.

      These rooftiles have major downsides as compared to regular rooftiles. You’d be much better off just installing regular rooftiles and putting solar panels on top of that. Like most people are already doing today. The only reason to go for these kinds of solar rooftiles is because of the esthetic. They make poor rooftiles and poor solar panels at the same time. And they are more expensive than any other solution.

      I doubt these will ever become practical, let alone standard on all roofs. And neither should we really want to.

      • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The article talks about colored graphics that can be applied to a panel. So not panels that are shaped like tiles. So they are still normal panels but with colors on them. So these are probably usefully for facades, like the side of a tall building.