Solar roadways

[smithrh]

You realize that he's been working with GE, MIT, the Federal Highway Association, and several of the world's leading glass research institutes right?

Define - exactly - what "working with" entails.

I'd wager it's much much much much less than what most people expect.

Make a call to GE to ask about some module's availability - bam, "we're working with GE!"

Get a tiny $1000 grant from the FHA - bam, "we're working with the FHA!"

You get the picture.

...and so on and so forth until you dazzle people who don't know any better.

 

[NT1440]

Define - exactly - what "working with" entails.

I'd wager it's much much much much less than what most people expect.

Make a call to GE to ask about some module's availability - bam, "we're working with GE!"

Get a tiny $1000 grant from the FHA - bam, "we're working with the FHA!"

You get the picture.

...and so on and so forth until you dazzle people who don't know any better.

Why don't you watch some of his talks to get a feel.

As far as glass goes, he worked with several universities to get the traction coefficient just right for roadways (a car traveling at 80 mph). In fact, they told him that they needed to take it down a notch because the glass they codeveloped had to much friction, more than asphalt in fact.

 

[Astroboy907]

...they told him that they needed to take it down a notch because the glass they codeveloped had to much friction, more than asphalt in fact.

Until they use this glass on hi-speed raceways I don't see it having "more traction". If this is all that it puts up to be, why don't we have it now? I fail to see how more traction would be a disadvantage for our roads.

 

[NT1440]

Until they use this glass on hi-speed raceways I don't see it having "more traction". If this is all that it puts up to be, why don't we have it now? I fail to see how more traction would be a disadvantage for our roads.

Friction, it makes things less fuel efficient because it gets too grippy. Think of people driving pickup trucks with giant knobby tires, they get far less mileage simply because there is more friction. Asphalt itself has a huge range in friction coefficients tied to the particular use case.


As to the underlined...computers, refrigeration, and asphalt, the logic you've outlined could be said of every one of those before they hit mass production.

Glass engineering is finally coming into it's own in the 21st century, by tweaking it's chemical treatments you can make it stronger than steel or flexible enough to wrap around a soda can (willow glass).

 

[Astroboy907]

Friction, it makes things less fuel efficient because it gets too grippy. Think of people driving pickup trucks with giant knobby tires, they get far less mileage simply because there is more friction. Asphalt itself has a huge range in friction coefficients tied to the particular use case.


As to the underlined...computers, refrigeration, and asphalt, the logic you've outlined could be said of every one of those before they hit mass production.

Glass engineering is finally coming into it's own in the 21st century, by tweaking it's chemical treatments you can make it stronger than steel or flexible enough to wrap around a soda can (willow glass).

Point taken, but as for the one bolded statement, I always assumed it was
1. The pickup truck. Not exactly very fuel efficient
2. If you are talking about larger non-stock tires, wouldn't the truck have to produce more torque to overcome the added weight of the tire and the difference in diameter from stock, thus consuming more fuel?

Of course, correct me if I am wrong (you learn something new every day).

As for the solar roadways project, it's a bust. No offense, but the amount of engineering problems present as pointed out here and in other forums show that it is completely illogical for roadways. Especially weight distribution- which they have shown basically none of. I mean, look at the "tractor" in the video. It's tiny. I live in an agricultural community, and I've seen my fair share of these going down the road.

As discussed here, it's simply not worth the cost to build as roads. Sidewalks, sure, but not roads. I'm all in favor of scrapping solar "freakin" roadways and seeing more concentration of the same type of system for roofing and architectural use.

 

[NT1440]

Point taken, but as for the one bolded statement, I always assumed it was
1. The pickup truck. Not exactly very fuel efficient
2. If you are talking about larger non-stock tires, wouldn't the truck have to produce more torque to overcome the added weight of the tire and the difference in diameter from stock, thus consuming more fuel?

Of course, correct me if I am wrong (you learn something new every day).

As for the solar roadways project, it's a bust. No offense, but the amount of engineering problems present as pointed out here and in other forums show that it is completely illogical for roadways. Especially weight distribution- which they have shown basically none of. I mean, look at the "tractor" in the video. It's tiny. I live in an agricultural community, and I've seen my fair share of these going down the road.
Image

As discussed here, it's simply not worth the cost to build as roads. Sidewalks, sure, but not roads. I'm all in favor of scrapping solar "freakin" roadways and seeing more concentration of the same type of system for roofing and architectural use.

It's funny, all of the naysayers seem to point to problems that the solar roadways project has already addressed, but for some reason these enlightened reporters can't seem to do their own damn homework. The technology, as already engineered can withstand 250,000 lbs, almost 4 times the legal limit on highways now.

I've seen articles about the angle of sunlight coming in being less than ideal, so the whole project is a bust. Well guess what, IF these people did more than simply ask a question they'd see that the hexagonal texture that they've come up with refracts light to go straight down into the panel regardless of the the position the sun is currently in.

I keep seeing people post about snow, showing they haven't done more than 5 seconds of looking because one of the main points here is that these panels heat themselves so that ice and snow don't accumulate.

As for the pickup truck, I was referring to if you take the same exact truck. If you use the normal tires it gets better fuel mileage than if you stick the off-roading knobby tires on it. It's a function of friction.

Again, I'm not saying they've found all the answers, but I'd appreciate it if people would actually look into their own criticisms before spouting nonsense that has already been overcome.

Here's a great briefing on the project from 2013, being introduced by Morgan Spurlock from GOOGLE's solve for X conference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPKytx9dJ54

 

[Astroboy907]

There are just too many unaddressed problems to make it viable - not to mention the cost. Someone did a cost-estimate for these and it was somewhere around 50x as expensive as asphalt.

The video makes it seem as if it was perfect. And if it could be done, reliably, at a low cost point, with all the features in the video I would be all for it.
But it's just a bad idea for roadways.

Get some other road technology, and save solar for the roofs.

----------

It's funny, all of the naysayers seem to point to problems that the solar roadways project has already addressed, but for some reason these enlightened reporters can't seem to do their own damn homework. The technology, as already engineered can withstand 250,000 lbs, almost 4 times the legal limit on highways now.

Here. Take a link to a forum of engineers who comment on the issue. In this case, a lot of engineers who have as much or more experience than the people trying to produce solar roadways.
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/solar-roadways/

 

[NT1440]

There are just too many unaddressed problems to make it viable - not to mention the cost. Someone did a cost-estimate for these and it was somewhere around 50x as expensive as asphalt.

The video makes it seem as if it was perfect. And if it could be done, reliably, at a low cost point, with all the features in the video I would be all for it.
But it's just a bad idea for roadways.

Get some other road technology, and save solar for the roofs.

----------



Here. Take a link to a forum of engineers who comment on the issue. In this case, some engineers who have 20+ years MORE experience than the people trying to produce solar roadways.
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/solar-roadways/

I don't understand. People act like this is an all in or nothing project. The town this guy is from is looking to put it into a few parking lots first then expand. Why do people cite the cost of doing the entirety of the US's highway system as if any infrastructure happens in a one shot deal?

The first 5 posts immediately talk about orientation (we've discussed this), fragility of glass (clearly not glass engineers), etc,etc.

Also, I have no idea how you got the notion that the video makes this seem like a perfect product. He VERY CLEARLY discusses the iteration and refinements that have happened and are still ongoing. Does that sound like a finished concept to you? When I first started following this nearly 3 years ago now, they were giant square segments, now after more R&D they are hexagonal and they are that way because they found it made more sense to manufacture, to maintain, and to deploy that way. This is very clearly a concept that is continuously being vetted and refined by hundreds (if not thousands) of people from every walk of the engineering field.


Frankly I don't care about anyone's opinion on this unless they've at least made an effort to see what challenges have already been considered. Remember, just because you are a bridge engineer, doesn't mean you know anything about structural glass, and if you are a glass engineer doesn't mean that you know much about solar voltaics. I don't care about engineer's career length, if they are too lazy to look into the actual details of a project before it off then all they've done is armchair engineer on the internet.

The whole point of the program was that the FHA is looking for a new generation of paving material that pays itself off in its lifetime. Solar will do that and then some.

 

[Astroboy907]

I don't understand. People act like this is an all in or nothing project. The town this guy is from is looking to put it into a few parking lots first then expand. Why do people cite the cost of doing the entirety of the US's highway system as if any infrastructure happens in a one shot deal?

Because that would be the cost of doing the whole infrastructure. It's going to cost the same whether it takes us 20 years or 5. Microcontrollers, heaters, pipes, LEDs, and solar panels cost a whole lot more than some asphalt.

If this was a cost-viable idea then we would pretty much have solar panels on every house in the nation. Ever look at the cost of solar panels? It's not cheap.

The first 5 posts immediately talk about orientation (we've discussed this), fragility of glass (clearly not glass engineers), etc,etc.

Then what authority does the creator of solar roadways have? He has the same degree as the people there.

[snip]Frankly I don't care about anyone's opinion on this[/snip]

And therein lies the rub

Frankly I don't care about anyone's opinion on this unless they've at least made an effort to see what challenges have already been considered. Remember, just because you are a bridge engineer, doesn't mean you know anything about structural glass, and if you are a glass engineer doesn't mean that you know much about solar voltaics.

So you are a bridge engineer, a glass engineer, a mechanical engineer, an electronics engineer, and a civil engineer? Congratulations then! Getting a minimum of three degrees must have taken quite some work. I'd consider sending you resume to the man in charge of this project.

I don't care about engineer's career length, if they are too lazy to look into the actual details of a project before it off then all they've done is armchair engineer on the internet.

I'd advise reading through the link I gave you some more. Around the second page it gets more interesting.

----------

Also, I have no idea how you got the notion that the video makes this seem like a perfect product. He VERY CLEARLY discusses the iteration and refinements that have happened and are still ongoing. Does that sound like a finished concept to you? When I first started following this nearly 3 years ago now, they were giant square segments, now after more R&D they are hexagonal and they are that way because they found it made more sense to manufacture, to maintain, and to deploy that way. This is very clearly a concept that is continuously being vetted and refined by hundreds (if not thousands) of people from every walk of the engineering field.

Edited after I replied...

As for the bold, absolutely not. That is the point.
And how are hexagons any easier to manufacture and deploy? Besides that, they would be able to fit a ton more solar cells in a square segment.

This is very clearly a concept that is continuously being vetted and refined by hundreds (if not thousands) of people from every walk of the engineering field.

Wouldn't you say that anyone who has hundreds of engineers vetting their idea wouldn't need a kickstarter project to fund it?

 

[rhett7660]

I for one hope it, or something very similar works. Even if on a small scale.

 

[mariefuller]

Maybe in a hundred million years this could work....

 

[juliehrobak]

That could never work. Be realistic. Put it on the sidewalks or something if you really feel the need to do it.

 

[turtle777]

I feel like discussing this with people lacking any engineering and common sense is like me discussing nuclear fission with my pet turtle.

Entertaining

-t

 

[mariefuller]

I feel like discussing this with people lacking any engineering and common sense is like me discussing nuclear fission with my pet turtle.

Entertaining

-t

The turtle must think you talk like an idiot, if you want to humor that analogy.