|
Xort...who removed the thread? It just disappeared with no comment at all.
Actually the claim that the panels were somehow putting out more wattage on a regular basis than rated for was an early claim. Unfortunately how much extra power has never been stated nor has any proof for the claim been offered. The state of California tested over 60 different BP panels and found no such excess output even though they did not test the 50 watters used by SS. They did test a number of panels in the same series and of the same construction as the ones SS is using. In fairness, their test conditions are different than the mfr. STC test conditions but one might expect the panels to perform better than most other similar panels tested if they indeed are capable of regular higher output than their STC rating. Absent other data, I guess we'll have to wait till summer and the PS article to resolve the issue.
BTW...STC test conditions are in full direct overhead sunlight (i.e. with the panels pointed directly at the sun)... at sea level with a slight breeze blowing and an operating surface temperature of 77 degrees...a happy coincidence of near perfect conditions. This prompted California to set their own rating procedure which they feel is more real world and typically results in power ratings that are reduced on average by about 10% from manufacturer STC ratings.
|