Solar freaking roadways! - 621 miles to be built in France.

[klh2000]

1 hour ago, Codeplayer said:

This guy is so focused to writing down the idea, that he misses the point. Going to moon was not efficient too. But if there is no pioneering, no demand, the technology will never evolve to reasonable phase.

He isn't really missing the point, they're only half as efficient as normal consumer grade panels and they will cost much more to produce and maintain. If there is even a thin film of dust on the panels that will cut efficiency by half, again. This means they will be only 1/4 as efficient as consumer grade panels can be, which will cost only half as much.

[bob345]

4 minutes ago, Codeplayer said:

I am not comparing technologies, I am comparing development of materials. I never said Carbon fiber is 50% plastic, I said that Boeing 787 fuselage is made out of 50% Composite- Plastic, carbon fibre reinforced. still, 53 years ago it still wasn't realistic that this material would ever have anything to do with bringing down the costs of materials for airplanes. Why it has to be clear? The element that generates electricity is not clear. The glass that covers it is. With material development, it is possible that this leads to developing new nanomaterials (just one of the million possibilities) that can be mixed into asphalt or concrete. There are tons of ways that would make the glass covering on solar cells unneccessary, that will be developed in future. Ofcourse, this kind of development wouldn't be needed, if we'd keep our solar panels on rooftops and wouldn't walk on them. But hey, if we could develop a material that collects some of the suns power, does that inexpensively and isn't very productive, but would still pay for itself. Then we could have free road mainteanance- every road would pay for its mainteanance itself. theninja35 (above) from Michigan would have beautiful, enjoyable roads. Think of Africa, India. None of this will ever happen, if there won't be someone who says that, hey I know, it costs more, but we will build it, just to prove the point that its worth developing, just to inspire people. Like 7 gamers one cpu for 30000$.

The element that generates the electricity is not clear because it needs to absorb as much light as it can. It is also very fragile so it needs a protective layer over it. Don't plan on some magic material being developed. That is why allot of startups fail. They are too focused on some fantasy they have in their heads that they fail to see what is real and feasible and what is not. Like i said before, even if a super efficient solar tech is developed, using it on a roadway is inherently a bad idea and a waste of resources. Why? Because the sun does not sit in the same position for 24 hours a day.  Realistically any given section of solar roadway would only be at its peak efficiency for an hour or less. Even less if its in a big city with tall buildings. No advancement in technology will change that. Solar roadways are a flawed fantasy and nothing is going to change that no mater how optimistic you are. As an engineer, once you really get to know the science and engineering that goes into these things, it gets quite easy to filter through all the BS tech and psudoscience. Also hate how people throw around "nanomaterials" all the time. Its just a buzz word that journalists like to throw around that really has no meaning other than to describe some fancy new compound or composite material that the journalist doesn't fully understand.

[SuperCookie78]

why don't people just build roofs over the roads with solar panels on them. that way the roads are better protected from the weather and the sun can stop blinding people

[Burusutazu]

Why not use panels that convert heat to energy? Cars running over a road generate heat by friction, along with the fact that during the summer asphalt can get burning hot.

[Misanthrope]

I expect Thunferf00t to tear them a new asshole soon.

[Technous285]

3 hours ago, SuperCookie78 said:

why don't people just build roofs over the roads with solar panels on them. that way the roads are better protected from the weather and the sun can stop blinding people

Part of that problem is how does one regulate the minimum height of the panels and the maximum height of the vehicles for loooooong stretches of road. Have the panels too high and it's a problem to work on them safely and easily, have them too low and cut off access to a major road for taller vehicles such as cargo container-carrying trucks. And that's not including the problems with tree maintenance along the edge of the road to keep leaf litter, sticks and limbs from falling on the panels and either obscuring them or outright damaging them.

 

South Korea's worked around that (to an extent) by having the multi-lane highways have a bike-only area where most other countries would have dividing islands , and running the roof of solar panels along THAT area of the highway, leaving the main roads open and safe for trucks and cars alike, and no chance of tree damage as the trees are on the outer edge of the road and the panels are on the inner edge.

[suicidalfranco]

why not make it also kinetic?

[ChineseChef]

I am really glad someone is doing this.  Because after they do it, we can see how much it costs, how much it actually produces, how much it actually breaks.  We can see real world results, not the white board warriors from both sides arguing over if it is a good idea.  We can get the real truth, assuming no one designs it to fail or fudges the numbers to make it look good (I mean, no one does that when money is involved right?)

 

Personally I think it is an absolutely stupid idea, just make dedicated space for roads, like we already have.  And then also make dedicated space for solar panels.  That way each one only has to be designed to be good at one thing.  But I am glad someone is actually doing it.  So we can see who is truly correct.  I am more than willing to be proven wrong, and this is finally a chance for the solar roadways crowd to get their chance to be proven idiots, or show us how wrong we all are.

[Albatross]

That oughta heat up the area...

[LukeTim]

I believe it has already been done to a small extent in Denmark (or The Netherlands, I forget) along a short stretch of bicycle path...

[dalekphalm]

11 hours ago, LukeTim said:

I believe it has already been done to a small extent in Denmark (or The Netherlands, I forget) along a short stretch of bicycle path...

See the above YT videos posted from EEVBlog - the guy is an engineer who does the math on these things to show how obsurd the idea is when implemented in practice.

 

Basically, the Netherlands Solar Bike Path is six times less cost effective compared to regular - "nothing special" - rooftop solar installations (And we're not even talking the ultra-efficient commercial-grade solar equipment that a real solar farm would use).

 

I personally think the idea is stupid, because roads are going to be driven on - a lot - so that means anytime a car is overtop a panel, it's effectively not producing any power at all. Rush hour? Entire panel system is producing negligible amounts of power.

 

Some people will argue "Well it's better to have SOME power over no power" - and that's correct to an extent... If the only option was "this or nothing". If the city wants to invest in solar power, then invest in solar power!

I don't understand why France doesn't first invest in putting rooftop installations on every single government building. Then, they can get creative with roadway construction and planning - eg: Like South Korea - have solar panels flank the roads, or have them in the middle where often a divider is placed. Or have bike paths that have solar panels ontop of the bike path, etc.

There are so many better ideas then this, that I don't see why it makes sense.

 

With that in mind, I do agree with this:

16 hours ago, ChineseChef said:

I am really glad someone is doing this.  Because after they do it, we can see how much it costs, how much it actually produces, how much it actually breaks.  We can see real world results, not the white board warriors from both sides arguing over if it is a good idea.  We can get the real truth, assuming no one designs it to fail or fudges the numbers to make it look good (I mean, no one does that when money is involved right?)

 

Personally I think it is an absolutely stupid idea, just make dedicated space for roads, like we already have.  And then also make dedicated space for solar panels.  That way each one only has to be designed to be good at one thing.  But I am glad someone is actually doing it.  So we can see who is truly correct.  I am more than willing to be proven wrong, and this is finally a chance for the solar roadways crowd to get their chance to be proven idiots, or show us how wrong we all are.

Let them do it - let us see a real world, practical implementation - and then let us watch it fail. We'll get the real, practical math, and be able to say "Well this cost us x amount more than if we'd done a traditional solar farm" etc. Hell, maybe by some miracle of science, this will actually be a really kickass setup - but I doubt it.

[ShadowCaptain]

what a time to be alive

[Ex14]

wait wasnt the real reason the solar roadway concept was really interesting was the fact that In addition to being solar panels (inefficient as they are but yea) it was also the idea that these road ways could de ice themselves and adapt road markings according to the situation. I mean yea the math probably doesn't make sense now for just solar panels on the path/ roads BUT I guess at least its a step in that direction.