Here at NationSwell, we’ve ooh’d and ahh’d at the remarkable technology of solar panels several times. But regardless of how awesome and environmentally friendly they are, there are some people who are concerned about how “unsightly” they look on top of their neighbors’ houses.
Well, thanks to Michigan State University (MSU) researchers, the aesthetically-interested can keep their precious view.
According to a statement from the university, a team at MSU’s College of Engineering have invented a completely see-through solar panel that can be used on anything with a clear surface, such as windows and smart phones.
“It opens a lot of area to deploy solar energy in a non-intrusive way,” says Richard Lunt, assistant professor of chemical engineering who led the team. “It can be used on tall buildings with lots of windows or any kind of mobile device that demands high aesthetic quality like a phone or e-reader. Ultimately we want to make solar harvesting surfaces that you do not even know are there.”
MORE: These 10 States Are Leading the Way in Solar Power. What’s Their Secret?
The panel — called a “transparent luminescent solar concentrator” — uses small organic molecules that absorbs invisible wavelengths of sunlight and channels it to the photovoltaic solar cells on the panel’s edge, converting it into electricity.
It’s important to note that this current version is only about 1 percent efficient (whereas the most efficient panels can convert up to 40 percent) but the researchers are aiming for efficiencies beyond 5 percent.
But it’s clear (see what we did there?) that this is only just the beginning. As solar technology continues its rise and becomes less expensive, it’s helping our country shift away from its reliance on fossil fuels. And, yes, for those who are concerned, perhaps this future is one that isn’t clouded by those clunky panels.
DON’T MISS: This Texas Solar Farm Relies on a Flock of Sheep to Perform Maintenance
Tag: Michigan State University
Why It Took A Plea From A Pizza Guy to Increase Michigan’s Higher Education Funding
As the recent news of Starbucks offering to pay for its employees college tuition reveals, higher education is not a privilege of the elite.
That’s a message education leaders in Michigan have been trying to illustrate to lawmakers as funding for higher education was reduced by about $1 billion in total cuts over the past 10 years. Back in 2011, the leader of another national chain pitched in to persuade Michigan lawmakers to include Governor Rick Snyder’s proposal for a 6 percent increase in funding higher education in the state’s 2015 budget.
“The fact that the pizza guy is coming to them to talk about higher education funding is unexpected,” said Patrick Doyle, the CEO of Domino’s Pizza.
Doyle, as a part of the Business Leaders for Michigan, argued that the state was not producing enough candidates with the skills to run and operate the online component of his Ann-Arbor-based company, which is one of the state’s biggest employers. In fact, just three in 10 adults in Michigan held a college degree—including only some, but certainly not all, of the state’s lawmakers themselves.
The Business Leaders for Michigan coalition, which is comprised of Michigan’s highest-ranking business and university leaders, contends that investing in higher education is integral to growth — just as much as population or jobs programs.
“It’s a producer of economic impact. It’s part of the overall economy,” said Doug Rothwell, president of the business leaders.
The coalition recognized higher education as an asset in its first release of the Michigan Turnaround Plan in 2009. The plan identified the state’s major strengths and areas for potential growth, which included Michigan’s higher education system as a major economic asset. Like elsewhere in the country, the group found a disparity between the available jobs and the workforce’s skills. Michigan ranks 30th for the nation’s educated workforce.
So why are they not being filled? In part, it’s because of the [lack of] college affordability,” Rothwell said.
The group began lobbying for performance-based funding as a means of increasing cash for colleges in 2011 before lawmakers allocated $21.9 million in new appropriations in 2014. Success rates are determined by such factors as graduation rates and administrative costs.
Though support has been gradual, Governor Snyder’s 2015 budget includes the largest increase to higher education funding in more than a decade. The boost — $80 million out of the $1.4 billion in funding — includes a 3.2 percent cap on tuition increases in order to receive full state funding.
Michigan’s inclusion of higher education funding is part of a greater trend sweeping the country. Only nine states have decided not to include some sort of funding increase for the 2015 budget, and 25 states have implemented policy for performance-based funding for their higher education institutions.
While performance metrics aren’t ideal for larger universities, the method does benefit all types of colleges and universities as a whole. As the Business Leaders for Michigan have illustrated, the education system is better off when higher education receives a bigger piece of the funding pie.
MORE: Delaware Pushes to Get More Low-Income Students Enrolled in Higher Education
Could a National Sales Tax Ease American Inequality?
The U.S. has one of the highest levels of income inequality among the world’s industrialized nations. The imbalance between rich and the poor is a popular political topic — President Barack Obama even focused his State of the Union address on the issue. Michigan State University law professor Reuven S. Avi-Yonah has an idea that he can help: he wants to implement a national sales tax.
MORE: This State May Have Discovered the Secret to Saving Tax Dollars While Doing Good
Sure, this idea is probably at the very top of the list for politically unpopular topics, but don’t write Avi-Yonah off just yet. By using the Gini Coefficient, a measure of statistical dispersion that represents income distribution, Avi-Yonah discovered that income inequality in the U.S. is on the rise while social mobility is on the decline, making it one of the most unequal developed economies, while countries like Germany and Japan are more balanced. By comparing the U.S. to these countries, he found a clear difference: the presence of a national sales tax — or, more specifically, a value added tax (VAT). While states levy a sales tax on consumers who purchase goods and services, funds from a national sales tax could go even further. “One key to reducing inequality in the U.S. is to bolster the social safety net,” Avi-Yonah writes in his report.
But why a national sales tax over other forms of funding? For one, these types of taxes are used in more than 150 countries and have a demonstrated ability to raise revenues. VATs are not income taxes, which are easy for some Americans to avoid and can discourage work. Sales taxes are also paid by all members of society — the old and young, rich and poor. Plus, a sales tax is cheaper to administer than income taxes. Sound like a no-brainer? Well, try getting any new tax past congress.
ALSO: How to Get People to Save When All They Want to Do Is Play the Lottery