Well, that's neat.

But where is that really relevant? Typical albedo of anything around a solar panel seems to be like around .2, meaning that these cells which have 23% efficiency on the front, and ~21% on the back.
Solar Irradiance is usually less than 7kWh/m²day.
So this Panel could get around 1.6kWh/m²day on the front and 0.3kwH/m²day on the back.

Isn't cost way more relevant than getting a few more % efficiency?

As long as "we" (as in humanity) can't afford to put solar panels on the top of every/most surfaces that we build, it seems that driving down the cost is more paramount.
Luckily that is happening too though

This is nothing new, bifacial solar panels are on the market for well over a year now...

e.g. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/08/jolywood-unveils-black-bifacial-module/

Cheap and readily available...

Hmm, I talked with grid solar people who've been using this for a while about a year ago. Maybe this is a new version? Anyway, they were saying that it really helps in the winter when you can harvest the reflected light from the snow. But doesn't do a ton usually.

TLDR; the front side is 23% efficient, and the rear side 20% efficient.

They don't actually give an overall efficiency but it implies a total of 43%. They compare this to typical panels also at 23% efficient, so it's really remarkable if true. Other emerging solar tech is up to about 32% but if that could also benefit from multiple layers then total efficiency could become insane.

Seems a little too good to be true, really, but great if so.

Edit: Yeah, I don't think these efficiencies can be added like that. I guess the overall efficiency will depend on how reflective the ground under the panels is, and they will extract 20% of that. Maybe that's why they don't give an overall rating.

I'm pretty positive this has been a thing for a while? Though I have no proof.

I have also invented double-sided paper which holds vastly more information.

Wow, that's great for planets in twin star systems.

What i got from the article is a panel can get 20% more energy this way. So a 500 watt panel could harvest 600 watts. 500 from the front and 100 fromthe back.

It’s interesting that we usually assume the scattered light that has been reflected has much less energy left. Glad to see more movement in renewable energy production.

Good

Well cost is the main consideration. I mean most would consider cost per kW primarily. Efficiency only counts for something when it's a factor in cost. It's good when solar panels can be smaller, but in utility installations space is usually not a limitation.