Solar Roadways

[Izzy]

It seems more worthwhile to just put solar panels everywhere. Why do they need to be on the roads? The gimmicks such as putting lights on the road aren't worth it at all.

[benguino]

I think one of the other gimmicks that was mentioned was the ability to have the solar roadways maintain a temperature just above freezing which would permanently get rid of the problems caused by icy roads.

EDIT: Not to mention I think such an infrastructure would pave the way for "smart roads" in the future, whatever that means.

[top]

safer, smarter, environmentally friendly, produces monetary gain in the future, no more bitchin about not enough electricity

seriously wtf isn't to love about this? if youre against this i simply don't understand why.

the ROAD is the light source to see at night!!! that's so baller~

[hi19hi19]

Originally Posted by Izzy

It seems more worthwhile to just put solar panels everywhere. Why do they need to be on the roads? The gimmicks such as putting lights on the road aren't worth it at all.

People seem to think that since roads are, by their nature, already flat and dark, they'd be a good place.
Besides, they serve no other purpose besides carrying vehicles at the moment, as opposed to other places you might put solar panels (say, in the middle of a big field) that could be used for other things (such as raising livestock).

Not sure that's a hugely compelling argument, but I'd guess that's the thinking.

[top]

Originally Posted by Izzy

It seems more worthwhile to just put solar panels everywhere. Why do they need to be on the roads? The gimmicks such as putting lights on the road aren't worth it at all.

roads take up a massive chunk of space, why NOT put solar panels there? couldn't hurt anything, especially considering they can handle the weight of vehicles etc.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by hi19hi19

I think we're confusing "producing some benefit" for "benefit that's actually worth the astronomical initial investment and high maintenance costs"

Solar farms, coal burning plants, nuclear, and wind turbines all also cost a lot of initial investment and have high maintenance costs.

Maybe we should just not generate any electricity at all.

These are not just expensive roads. These are expensive roads that could displace the entire energy model in place and replace it with something good, useful, and significantly less damaging to the environment. Oh, and they would be safer, more versatile, and never need to be plowed or salted. Do you understand how HUGE that is?

Originally Posted by Izzy

and costing a million times more than current roadways.

and the projections indicate that overall the US would generate 3x enough electricity for the entire country if every road was converted

You don't think that they would account for general use wear when considering that?

Even if it only produced a fraction of our electricity needs, it'd still be worth it for EVERY OTHER REASON though.

[noname219]

Every product needs to be tested thoroughly before being mass produced. Even if technology evolves fast, I don't think I'll see it on the highways before maybe 2020. For now, it's a prototype. How will it endure the more extreme temperatures in winter (freeze-thaw) is another story. Initial cost and maintenance is something that needs to be considered before mass producing these things. Small-scale testing to see how it will react in real life seems like the next step to me. Looks promising, but we'll have to be patient on such large scale projects.

edit : found the cost to cover solar panels on all paved roads in the US... $56 trillions (revenue for 2015 US federal budget is $3.34 trillion btw)

[Afrobean]

Small-scale testing to see how it will react in real life seems like the next step to me.

This has been in development since 2006.

They've already been working on that "next step" for quite some time.

edit: the roads wouldn't all be converted overnight, don't be stupid. They generate revenue, so they'd pay for themselves OVER TIME.

[Kekeb]

From what I've been presented, this seems like an awful idea. We would have to clean and/or replace panels consistently due to debris cover and abrasions (the panels are protected by glass). Foliage and large buildings along routes would reduce effectiveness due to masking sunlight. The most ridiculous thing that strikes me is the fixed nature of the panels. They obviously can't tilt and rotate during the day, so they'll be inefficiently converting energy essentially 100% of the time.

My point is you could likely setup some solar farms and get a better ROI. Nobody is going to touch this if they have any sense.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by Kekeb

so they'll be inefficiently converting energy essentially 100% of the time.

Even if they only work at 1% efficiency, they'd still generate WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY more electricity than the current ones.

[Kekeb]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

Even if they only work at 1% efficiency, they'd still generate WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY more electricity than the current ones.

that's a lot of electricity

[Kekeb]

i'm sold

[Afrobean]

any amount is greater than 0

@~@

[noname219]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

This has been in development since 2006.

They've already been working on that "next step" for quite some time.

edit: the roads wouldn't all be converted overnight, don't be stupid. They generate revenue, so they'd pay for themselves OVER TIME.

When I said "next step" I meant a full road or paking permanent integration, not just a drive-way. If everything works fine at this point, they can expect more private clients. The government has better interest to wait until the price of the materials and production goes down before building their roads with solar panels.

[hi19hi19]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

any amount is greater than 0

@~@

Originally Posted by hi19hi19

I think we're confusing "producing some benefit" for "benefit that's actually worth the astronomical initial investment and high maintenance costs"

Once again, while yes you are producing a little bit of electricity, you have to think of the tradeoffs.
Just because something is good does not mean it is worthwhile economically.

Nobody is going to go for this project unless its expected earnings outstrip the other options for that money, such as traditional solar farms or coal/gas/nuclear/whatever power plants.

[rushyrulz]

Originally Posted by noname219

Found the cost to cover solar panels on all paved roads in the US... $56 trillions (revenue for 2015 US federal budget is $3.34 trillion btw)

That's why you start with solar driveways, then solar parking lots, then solar sidewalks, then solar highways/interstate, then solar inter-city roads (which could be funded on a city-by-city basis as well), over the period of 10-15 years, assuming all goes well.

Hell, if you kept these things lit well enough, headlights would become obsolete.

Only thing I'm mildly concerned about is that the dimpled texture of the panels might be annoying to drive on.

[choof]

fusion energy when

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

Hell, if you kept these things lit well enough, headlights would become obsolete.

No. Headlights are used so that cars are visible to other cars. They are NOT used to illuminate the road. The only time they should be used to throw light onto the road is in the case of small roads with no street lights where basically no one is around who might be blinded by your high beams.

Only thing I'm mildly concerned about is that the dimpled texture of the panels might be annoying to drive on.

Check the roads sometime. They're already textured. Especially if there is any wear and tear on the road at all. Don't even fucking get me started on potholes.

[Cavernio]

I wouldn't think that the friction of glass is safe to drive on at high speeds

[Reincarnate]

I'm amazed this hasn't set off your guys' bullshit detectors.

thunderf00t put together a great video illustrating the major problems: