Talk:Noor Abu Dhabi

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

93% efficiency

It's not the usual or expected efficiency % and it stands out because even the most bleeding edge development sample solar cells get barely over 30% efficiency. From the source it says "and a 93% efficiency rate in terms of energy availability." What they really mean is capacity factor - how much of what they could get (max 1.2 GW) are they actually getting. And it's looks like they want to say that when the sun is shining they get 93% of what the could possibly get - which is very good, probably too good to believe because when the sun is low in the sky (after sunrise for an hour or 2, and similar for sunset) the conversion efficiency would drop right off.

They were able to attain 2,000 GWh of power. Using 1.2GW x 8765 hrs/year = 10,518 GWh total possible, so only 20% gross capacity factor. Even if we factor in night and day cycles, so the best to be expected is 5GWh, so about 40% of best case expectations. It seems like with the 2000 GWh claimed the plant is getting the equivalent of 4.6 hrs of full power production a day.

No where near 93%.

Best to leave that number out.

Thanks. PCman999 (talk) 18:04, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]