Also the authors talk about how it also has piezoelectric, and other energy harvesting properties. But where exactly do we have a place for a material that makes energy, poorly, from mechanical, electrical, and thermal stresses? For example, the first four citations list papers that discuss hybrid energy generation materials. The first one considers a dual solar cell/ piezoelectric generator. It harvests sunlight (great) and ultrasonic energy from the surroundings (lol wat). Piezoelectricity is generated from deformation of the crystal, I'm not sure I want my solar cell being deformed in a magnitude and at a frequency that actually generates a useful output. I could go on, but I won't.
I think what happened is they found this material to be interesting--- it is no doubt--- but needed to write a paper and 'sexy/sensational' science sells(gets grant money).
I think what happened is they found this material to be interesting--- it is no doubt--- but needed to write a paper and 'sexy/sensational' science sells(gets grant money).
That's what I suspected too, which is why I asked.
Journalistic articles on science often ignore that same factor: quantity. Like when they say a compound found in red wine prolongs life, they don't mention that you'd need to drink 1000 bottles of red wine a day.
I'd be more interested if this material could be integrated into upper reaches of skyscrapers so the natural sunlight and wind motions generate little bits of electricity to help offset powering the building costs.
[–] 7943169? 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago (edited ago)
What quantity of electricity?
[–] Owlchemy [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Good question, but I don't know. Maybe someone else will.
[–] 7943488? 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Here's the primary source if someone wants to dig the answer out of that: http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4974735
[–] Artooweaboo 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
The pyroelectric coefficient of the material is reported as 26 μC/m2 K, this compares poorly to lots of other materials; see the following paper. http://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2062916
Also the authors talk about how it also has piezoelectric, and other energy harvesting properties. But where exactly do we have a place for a material that makes energy, poorly, from mechanical, electrical, and thermal stresses? For example, the first four citations list papers that discuss hybrid energy generation materials. The first one considers a dual solar cell/ piezoelectric generator. It harvests sunlight (great) and ultrasonic energy from the surroundings (lol wat). Piezoelectricity is generated from deformation of the crystal, I'm not sure I want my solar cell being deformed in a magnitude and at a frequency that actually generates a useful output. I could go on, but I won't.
I think what happened is they found this material to be interesting--- it is no doubt--- but needed to write a paper and 'sexy/sensational' science sells(gets grant money).
[–] 7943998? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
That's what I suspected too, which is why I asked.
Journalistic articles on science often ignore that same factor: quantity. Like when they say a compound found in red wine prolongs life, they don't mention that you'd need to drink 1000 bottles of red wine a day.
[–] Drunkenmoba ago
I'd be more interested if this material could be integrated into upper reaches of skyscrapers so the natural sunlight and wind motions generate little bits of electricity to help offset powering the building costs.