05-23-2014, 11:45 AM | #1 | ||
Resident Alien
Join Date: Jun 2001
|
Solar Freakin' Roadways!
|
||
05-23-2014, 12:02 PM | #2 |
Retired
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
|
I read an article on this a couple of months ago. Very cool idea. I hope it works.
|
05-23-2014, 12:11 PM | #3 |
Resident Alien
Join Date: Jun 2001
|
It sounds like a brilliant idea.
|
05-23-2014, 01:50 PM | #4 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Backwoods, SC
|
ughhh..
More solar=clean energy misinformation. Other than that its a neat idea. Other than the issue of conductors and grid ties and cost. Last edited by CU Tiger : 05-23-2014 at 01:51 PM. |
05-23-2014, 04:37 PM | #5 | |
High School Varsity
Join Date: May 2006
|
Quote:
For the uninformed, can you point me at resources that will explain how solar = clean-energy misinformation? My wife keeps bugging me to get solar panels on our roof, but i can't seem to find a good reason not to! |
|
05-23-2014, 06:33 PM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2003
|
Don't follow it too closely, but probably something along the lines of how producing the solar panels themselves involves toxic/carbon-intensive materials. On balance it's likely still cleaner, but there's room for improvement.
Last edited by nol : 05-23-2014 at 06:38 PM. |
05-23-2014, 06:38 PM | #7 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
|
I'm filing this under
"I'll believe it when I see it happen in practice"
__________________
"I am God's prophet, and I need an attorney" |
05-23-2014, 06:42 PM | #8 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
Quote:
I'd tend to think it's a short-term/long-term thing. Producing the solar panels isn't itself necessarily green, but the energy production, especially if the panels are rated for 75 years of use or whatever, probably mitigates the polluting effects of fossil fuels over that time period. |
|
05-23-2014, 06:48 PM | #9 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
|
Quote:
Their website says they hope to get 20 years out of each panel and 30 if they're lucky. Although one has to bear in mind repaving a road probably isn't green either.
__________________
"I am God's prophet, and I need an attorney" |
|
05-23-2014, 07:13 PM | #10 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Maryland
|
Yeah, I think I'd take that. Every year they're paving some stretch of the route I take to work, either along US 15 or something in Gettysburg.
__________________
null |
05-24-2014, 01:34 AM | #11 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
Yeah, Wisconsin is the same way. Been here six years and I don't think I've had one spring yet where a stretch of 41 or 43 in my general vicinity isn't being redone.
|
05-24-2014, 06:53 AM | #12 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Backwoods, SC
|
Producing the solar panels is way more polutant than producing fossil fuels.
The panels have a 25 year life span on the high end. Then you have a nightmare to dispose of in any form of green manner. The panels require enough silicate rectifiers and batteries to store/convert the energy that they become a major lead disposal issue. And then there is the issue that the amount of energy they produce in their life doesnt even cover their cost (without interest) without government subsidies. |
05-24-2014, 07:42 AM | #13 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Here and There
|
But when the zombies come you'll be kicking back in your basement drinking a cold beer.
|
05-24-2014, 07:43 AM | #14 | |
Retired
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
|
Quote:
Source needed. While some of your facts are right, most of them are extremely misleading. It's a nice bit of shitposting. Energy derived from coal/natural gas creates 10 times as much hazardous waste as a solar panel. While anything created in a manufacturing process will create waste - solar is no exception - it is significantly cleaner than any fossil fuel production. It's not as clean as hydro or wind, but we're not comparing solar to the those in this case. The more solar panels are made, the lower the overall waste per panel. Improvements in panel construction continue to change that dynamic - the 10% efficiency low-end panels today will get replaced by 20%+ panels in 20 years at the end of their lifespan. Lab tests are already up to 40% efficiency (CleanTechnica. Panels are already fairly cost effective and become more so as efficiencies are gained by mass production and improvements in technology. As for the lifespan and disposal, that's no different than an internal combustion engine, an electric engine or a spent nuclear rod. However, much of a solar panel can be recycled unlike some types of waste. And the waste is more confined than airborne pollutants spewed out for everyone to have to breathe. In short - solar energy is environmentally better than fossil fuels in every single way. Like anything, it has limitations but not only does it have fewer limitations, rapid gains in technology and manufacturing techniques are pushing solar to be even more competitive (and even exceed) other types of clean and dirty energy. Last edited by Blackadar : 05-24-2014 at 07:46 AM. |
|
05-24-2014, 07:49 AM | #15 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Here and There
|
If that were the case, why isn't it displacing more traditional sources? CU Tiger's comment about government subsidies is spot on - source my college economics textbook. I would love to see it be economically viable but everything you're describing is the same argument that has been made in the past going back to the 80s at least.
Last edited by Desnudo : 05-24-2014 at 07:50 AM. |
05-24-2014, 08:04 AM | #16 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
I was looking at solar shingles for the house. Those things are hella expensive
|
05-24-2014, 08:08 AM | #17 | ||
Retired
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
|
Quote:
Because even if it's the same cost, it wouldn't displace a traditional source because the cost of that source is already sunk. And solar has only recently become economically viable as compared to traditional fossil fuels. Rather than rewrite it, here's the wiki that answers your very question: Quote:
In short, prices are dropping rapidly and are for the first time competitive with traditional fossil fuels. Given that the above were achieved with significantly lessefficient solar panels than recent breakthroughs have shown possible, it's conceivable (if still debatable) that solar will become the most cost-effective fuel source for relatively sunny areas within a generation. Last edited by Blackadar : 05-24-2014 at 08:13 AM. |
||
05-24-2014, 11:21 AM | #18 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Backwoods, SC
|
That wiki is written and moderated by CEO of the largest solar panel producer in NA. And he lives in Charlotte, in Ballantyne Country Club on community house road to be exact. (Since you either live there are recently moved, I mention that so you will know the area)
Solar panels contain high very levels of mercury, which is easily handled so long as their disassembly is controlled and not by unintentional means. They are also largely comprised of silicates. Same reason you dont want to toss computer mother boards in the dump. Only the average commercial Solar Farm has more silicates than the sum of all motherboards sold int he US in 3 years (its been several months since I read this...I may be slightly off there it could be 4...but I know it was more than 1) Now here is the real rub with your cost data. It eliminates installation AND land costs. Things that are, you know, important. Its akin to the Energy Dept talking about the cost of Nuclear yet excluding the site work that has to be done for cooling pond/retention. As for sources for my info. A lot. When I sold my construction/tech company, I was approached by the aforementioned individual (whom I had wired his house and 2 of his manufacturing plants) to become an investor. I researched the shit out of it because I thought it was a once in a lifetime opportunity. At the end of my research I kept my money in my pocket. You are free to draw your own conclusions. |
05-24-2014, 11:49 AM | #19 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Maryland
|
What land costs are there for roads and parking lots though?
__________________
null |
05-24-2014, 01:32 PM | #20 | |
Retired
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
|
Quote:
Really? You want to claim that one guy controls the entire wiki? And while everything on there is sourced, you've provided none. But we should just take your word for it, right? Come on, you've got to provide some backup here. Otherwise, you're just shitposting. This sounds like something I'd expect to hear from a talking head like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. "Solar panels cause environmental pollution". "Solar panels take land". You know what? So does everything else! Without providing any sources or comparisons to other energy sources, your point is moot. You're better than that. Yes, solar panels contain minor amounts of mercury. Burning something like coal sends much more mercury into the atmosphere where it pollutes everything around it. Which one is worse? Creating wind turbines causes pollution and waste. So does building hydro facilities. It's a matter of which is the best option, not which is the perfect option. You're going to have a hard time trying to suggest that coal or natural gas is a better environmental alternative. Your best argument is that those are a better economic alternative, but the cost gap between solar and coal/gas is fast becoming virtually a non-issue. Last edited by Blackadar : 05-24-2014 at 01:35 PM. |
|
05-24-2014, 02:46 PM | #21 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Maryland
|
I think it will be interesting to see what more progressive countries do. In the US, you are going to get push-back from oil/coal industries. That may not be the case everywhere. If it's truly feasible we'll eventually get dragged along.
__________________
null |
05-25-2014, 02:35 PM | #22 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
|
Quote:
That got me to thinking: were we ever that country that you could watch to see what to do? SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!" Last edited by sterlingice : 05-25-2014 at 02:35 PM. |
|
05-25-2014, 02:36 PM | #23 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
|
Quote:
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to see some sources with good side-by-side comparisons. So far, you've just said "it's awful" with no sourcing other than to attack another source of information. SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!" |
|
05-25-2014, 02:44 PM | #24 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Are they sure this would hold up? I mean the idea is cool but roads take a beating around here. Can they handle extreme heat and extreme cold? What about heavy rain, ice and snow?
It's pretty cheap to patch up roadways right now. Wouldn't it be really expensive to have to replace these things everytime there is an accident or a shift in the ground causes issues? And can cars get the same traction on something like this? Like I said, it's a cool idea but a lot of these cool ideas often overlook the reason we've been doing things a certain way for so long. |
05-25-2014, 02:46 PM | #25 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
Late 1800's/early 1900's . There was so much innovation coming from this country that it changed the world. Everything from transportation to energy to how manufacturing was done. Steel, electricity, flight, cars, etc. Now most of the innovation takes place in other countries with less restrictions. |
|
05-25-2014, 09:36 PM | #26 |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
|
I love the idea that they melt the snow a bit. It would be cool to use them for my driveway and sidewalk. Sure I'd still have to shovel, but a few hours later the residual snow and ruts would be melted and I wouldn't have a slow build-up of packed snow over the winter. I wonder what the cost for the average driveway would be?
__________________
"Breakfast? Breakfast schmekfast, look at the score for God's sake. It's only the second period and I'm winning 12-2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, the Whale, they only beat Vancouver maybe once or twice in a lifetime." |
05-26-2014, 08:17 AM | #27 |
"Dutch"
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Tampa, FL
|
As usual, I think we are all excited about new technology. This is a technology that is being developed in the United States (if I'm not mistaken) and that's a good thing.
The problem though is that these panels are still wildly expensive, generally unreliable (it's solar power after all), troublesome to repair and keep clean and there are the concerns of disposal. It will be a massively expensive endeavor, start up costs for a nation as large as our will certainly be in the tens of billions (if not hundreds of billions) and annual maintenance in the hundreds of millions. Most of that start-up costs and annual maintenance will go to the billion-dollar mega-Solar-Corporations that replaces the US Coal Industry, so I'm not sure how much wealth is generated from this endeavor or if it's all cost and no profit for the average American. I'm interested, but I'm a realist, and want improvements in costs, use, and disposal before I get on board. Last edited by Dutch : 05-26-2014 at 08:20 AM. |
05-26-2014, 10:01 AM | #28 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Backwoods, SC
|
Quote:
I appreciate the response and your position. Im not a fan or typing books (as my post history will validate)...but let me reply this way if I may. You do not have to agree with my opinions as I am not sselling anything, mearly offering my opinion. Regarding the "best" power source we already have the best current available power source. Its called nuclear. Unfortunately we have a self imposed moratorium on new nuclear plants in this country. Coal is plentiful and cheap, but is not "clean"..it is becoming more clean but still not perfect. That said I think you will find that mining coal is cleaner than constructing solar panels, with the payoff being on the backside where solar does produce cleaner than coal. All of my thoughts have been directed at general solar technology, now let me address the this tech specifically. The additional cost and maintenance is a huge factor they are glossing over. Currently our electrical transmission system only carries power from sources to consumers. With this technology you will have conductors running the entire length of every roadway converted to this technology. Just think about this, currently power travels "as the crow flies" (think of every place where power lines cross roadways) however for this infrastructure to work the transmission lines will parallel the road ways. This increased length of conductor will require more copper and more copper mining and refining, that in itself is not a clean process. Next currently we transmit at high or medium voltage (tens or hundreds of thousands of volts...this varies pretty greatly by region and utility but as low at 5kV is common in areas and as high as 500kV is used commonly in other areas) the most modern and cutting edge solar panels produced are ~1000v..and these arent even legal for sale in the US currently. Remember that voltage and ampacity are inversly related so when you decrease voltage (by a factor of 500) you increase amapcity by the same factor. Now current is what dictates conductor size. Think of overhead power lines how "small" they are in diameter. They need to be roughly 500 times larger in diameter to conduct the same power at a lower voltage. That's not feasible so you end up using more conductors of the same size paralleled together. So instead of 4 over head lines you now have 2,000 lines running alongside the roadway in trough. Again this conductor increase costs money and requires maintenance and has an environmental and financial impact just in producing. So in short we have to transmit a much longer distance with many more conductors. Increased cost, increased material production, increased points of failure. [ side bar: inevitable when intelligent people outside of the electrical industry talk solar, it quickly get mentioned how Europe has integrated solar. A major issue here is the European infrastructure is an ungrounded electrical system, in the US we utilize ground distribution exclusively (actually required by law) while this grounded architecture makes for a safer grid, it also causes voltage float and balance issues that are not inherent to the European grid] Finally this pitch is idealistic in nature. It disregards fluid leaks, and other material that will build up on roadways. (imagine locking up the brakes and leaving a rubber skid on the roadway. ) Assuming that these deposits do not deteriorate or destroy the photovoltaic tiles it will certainly reduce their efficiency as it will serve to shade part of the surface. I heard this idead pitched at an EGSA meeting as far back as 2001 or 2002...it didnt gain traction then and it wont now. One final (final) hurdle will be gaining acceptance of the NTSB as the surface will have a lower coefficient of friction than asphalt or concrete effecting traction and braking maneuvers. It will also encounter legal issues when cracked tiles damage vehicles, and create new potential safety hazards in a crash. Sorry looks like I typed a book after all. Last edited by CU Tiger : 05-26-2014 at 10:11 AM. |
|
05-27-2014, 11:28 AM | #29 | |||||
Retired
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
|
Quote:
Ok, but let me respond to each point in kind. To start, you've been making statements of fact - not opinions - without any backup whatsoever. And when confronted by data that does not support your statements, you've hand-waved it away. You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but much of what you've posted can't be considered an opinion. Quote:
I agree that nuclear power has a place in any comprehensive scheme to make power "greener". Quote:
Source needed, because there's absolutely nothing out there that suggests that mining coal is cleaner than constructing solar panels. And even if it was somehow cleaner, it's still 10x dirtier when it's actually turned into power. Quote:
Valid concerns, all. I think you'll find that the transmission concentration has already been taken care of. Most power lines run next to roads, so I don't see the difference between an above-ground pole and an in-ground channel. However, I don't think anyone is advocating ripping down millions of miles of power lines in the next 10 years. However, when constructing new roadways, bridges and the like this technology (if proven) would be used and then tied into the existing power grid. Over time you would replace much of the power grid (which is inefficient) with generation sources which are much closer to the user, resulting in a more efficient system. Quote:
And I agree with you on all of these concerns. I don't think anyone is suggesting that we run out and repave I-95 with solar panels tomorrow. But the technology has come a long way since 2001 and 2002 - isn't it worth another look and serious consideration? Last edited by Blackadar : 05-27-2014 at 11:29 AM. |
|||||
05-27-2014, 11:36 AM | #30 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
|
Quote:
I thought of never shovelling the driveway again interests me greatly, especially after this past winter. However you should keep in mind that the snow melting abilities of the panels are still dependent on the existing power grid, according to the Solar roadway website. After all it's hard to generate solar energy when you're covered in snow.
__________________
"I am God's prophet, and I need an attorney" |
|
05-27-2014, 11:39 AM | #31 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
|
I enjoy the video even if I think that this will never get off the ground.
__________________
My listening habits |
05-27-2014, 11:40 AM | #32 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2013
|
dola
I should add that I'd be a lot more likely to contribute to Solar Roadways if it was more of an investment and not a donation to someone else's bank account.
__________________
"I am God's prophet, and I need an attorney" |
05-27-2014, 12:14 PM | #33 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Quote:
Or on it.
__________________
Board games: Bringing people back to the original social network, the table. |
|
05-27-2014, 02:07 PM | #34 | |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
|
Quote:
I'm not expecting it to melt all my snow, but when you shovel you get everything but a 'skim'. Over time that skim gets thicker and thicker unless you have a super awesome shovel, are super diligent, or chip it all away every so often. Even if the panels need to draw a bit of power to do it, they would quickly melt that skim away, meaning a nice smooth driveway year round.
__________________
"Breakfast? Breakfast schmekfast, look at the score for God's sake. It's only the second period and I'm winning 12-2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, the Whale, they only beat Vancouver maybe once or twice in a lifetime." |
|
05-27-2014, 02:30 PM | #35 |
Resident Alien
Join Date: Jun 2001
|
I want a laser system that zaps the snowflakes before they hit my driveway.
|
05-27-2014, 03:13 PM | #36 | |
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Quote:
You know what else produces a lot of mercury? Oil refining. You know what industry doesn't do a great job cleaning up the mercury it produces? The oil refining industry. See: mercury levels in Lake Michigan (i.e. the refinery at the southern end, near Chicago). |
|
05-27-2014, 03:20 PM | #37 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Mays Landing, NJ USA
|
I think that could be a nightmare for driving in at night or in sun glare, at least for me. Would be nice if it worked and really did as promised but I am not buying into the concept until it is proven.
|
05-27-2014, 04:31 PM | #38 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
If this is going to take off, they need some folks to buy them for driveways as tests and then see if they can get a small, prosperous and green-minded community to take the plunge and pave a segment of their jurisdiction with this tech to see whether the actual results make sense financially.
|
05-27-2014, 05:09 PM | #39 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
Quote:
It looks like radiant heated driveways are 15-25$ a foot. I'd assume this is a ton more. |
|
05-27-2014, 06:29 PM | #40 |
"Dutch"
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Tampa, FL
|
|
05-27-2014, 08:48 PM | #41 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Mays Landing, NJ USA
|
Quote:
If that is even close to true it dies there. That would cost about forty million to pave the street around one city block... A small block at that. |
|
05-27-2014, 08:48 PM | #42 | |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
|
Quote:
__________________
"Breakfast? Breakfast schmekfast, look at the score for God's sake. It's only the second period and I'm winning 12-2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, the Whale, they only beat Vancouver maybe once or twice in a lifetime." |
|
05-27-2014, 08:54 PM | #43 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Proof perhaps that crowdsourcing isn't immune to Barnum's Law.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
05-27-2014, 08:59 PM | #44 | |
Death Herald
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Le stelle la notte sono grandi e luminose nel cuore profondo del Texas
|
Quote:
More like $70/sq ft as the present time. (edit: that was the estimated cost in 2010) Solar Roadways passes $1.4 million in crowdfunding: Just short of the $56 trillion required, but not bad for a crazy idea | ExtremeTech
__________________
Thinkin' of a master plan 'Cuz ain't nuthin' but sweat inside my hand So I dig into my pocket, all my money is spent So I dig deeper but still comin' up with lint Last edited by cartman : 05-27-2014 at 09:00 PM. |
|
05-27-2014, 09:11 PM | #45 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Maryland
|
Well yeah, I don't know if using it on every road is exactly attainable, certainly not any time soon.
What I wonder though is if it could be installed in a new planned community or development. Like a next-generation Levittown or Columbia. Or heck, a Disney property.
__________________
null |
05-31-2014, 06:45 PM | #46 | |
"Dutch"
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Tampa, FL
|
Quote:
I had just read a 3.7m X 3.7m panel was $10000. Can't find the source now though. It could be used for highways though. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|