blueskywind wrote: »
Anyone have knowledge or experience for paint that has insulating values? thanks jc
BB. wrote: »
Niel is correct... Generally what radiates heat well also absorbs heat well.
I remember years ago that NASA spent a bunch of time and money trying to find the right "paint" that would reflect heat from the sun well and radiate heat to space well... If I recall correctly, the best material was not much better than any of the other options.
In the case of solar panels, I am not sure that it would make any difference at all... You have a slight insulation effect (paint is not a good conductor of heat, plus the back of the panels are plastic--also not a good heat conductor). And, you may end up with warranty problems--paints have solvents and additives which could attack the membrane materials on the back of the panels.
If you want to keep your panels cool--ensure there is at least 5-6 inches of airspace behind/under the panels and a way for air to circulate.
Ah--found one NASA report from 1983 (PDF file)... Has a whole bunch of information about colors/materials and their absorption and emission of heat. Hmm, looking at the results--I would probably be more tempted to paint the back of the panels white than black... Very similar emission results, and much less absorption with white.
But of so much variability (materials, coating thicknesses, the way it is applied, mounting differences, etc.)--You would really have to do A/B testing of your specific panels and coatings.
Don't think it is worth doing it...
don't think there is any paint out there that you can slap on the side of a home and save any money on your heating bills.
BB. wrote: »
See post #30 above from "Russ"... He tried it on a job and found SuperTherm did not add any measurable insulation effect.
I find it difficult to believe the claims myself.
Windsun wrote: »
Looks like we might have another one - this one looks like it might be an MLM type thing. Their claims are a "bit" exaggerated, to say the least.
TypeDr wrote: »
Please bear with me as I am a total newbie here. I should have figured that there would already be discussion and consensus regarding the Power-Save 1200, the KVAR PU-1200, and others, all in the $350-$399 price range.
There's also one brand, the Electric Saver 1200, which says it does the identical job as the first 2, but for $97.75.
1. Would whatever savings (if any?) on the electric bill be worth 1/4 the price? Or are the whole lot of these just hollow promises?
2. KVAR posts a Fact Sheet from the Program of the U.S. Department of Energy, which is attached at the end of this post. Is this really from the DoE?
Kellan wrote: »
You cannot legally integrate home-built solar panels into the grid, so any homebuilt project is strictly limited to a battery charging system.
niel wrote: »
as i've said many times it all depends on who does the inspections as it is up to them. the nec is not the law. one problem area, however, may be insurance companies as they may insist it be by the nec and like your inspector, they can mandate what they want.
crewzer wrote: »
Here's a new one I cam across today: http://www.heatsurge.com/overview.cfm
It's a 1,500 W heater ("...an amazing 5,119 BTU's") starting at $249!
Jim / crewzer
RobertMfromLI wrote: »
One of my servers does better... at 624W max, generates 2,662 BTU.