Live data from Hacker News

The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

sciencealert.com

151–160 of 349 posts

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#151
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fortunately we didn't give up on flight after the early airplanes. Airplanes are not amenable to hackers designing them. Getting one to fly required a directed engineering effort, with a series of prototypes each targeted at solving a specific problem. I think it was the first such project that did so. The Wrights are often dismissed as "bicycle mechanics", but if you take a closer look they were very competent eng…

I would disagree. History is full of airplanes that were built or modified (sometimes improved) by hackers. There's an immensely successful experimental aircraft industry, and I'm not just talking about people who are (successfully) building human-scale vtol drones.

> History is full of airplanes that were built or modified (sometimes improved) by hackers.

The FAA won't let you fly it until an engineer goes over your design. For very good reason.

An unbalanced airplane isn't going to fly, and one that isn't strong enough will fold up on you. There's a thin line between strong enough to hold together and light enough to get off the ground - and you cannot find that without math.

There were many hacker airplanes before the Wrights. They were all too heavy, too underpowered, too unstable, and too weak to fly. The Wrights, with math, solved those problems.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you talk more concretely? What is the back of the napkin calculation for total power if some percent of all highways were solar?

Not OP, but I was curious: Let's assume a good solar panel yields 15 watts per square foot under direct sunlight. The DOT estimates about 1.5 million acres of interstate in the US. Without getting too complicated, let's assume we produce at our ideal wattage for 3 hours a day. Given our ideal solar panel, this is 2.94 billion kWh per day. Getting ideal conditions on a highway surface is unrealistic, so let's assume o…

Ok thanks, so now I'm trying to understand why the people behind Wattway couldn't make this simple estimate.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#153
post #148
post #100

For some reason, solar roads are a very aggressive meme (in the classical sense of the word). They capture the imagination and blind people to engineering reality. Solar roads do not make any sense whatsoever, as you wrote pretty much any other place is better for panels.

They capture the imagination because there are plenty of places you don’t want to build solar panels. Namely places that you want to leave alone for ecological or recreational purposes. If you can take a piece of infrastructure that is pervasive throughout a built environment and give it additional purpose, then you can save on or reduce the land you specify for this purpose. Does it work? Apparently not, or at least…

It's not an experiment that can yield anything or teach us anything if there is no paper and no data. A fraudulent startup maybe.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#154
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but who argued against solar roads because of leaves killing the efficiency? I had my concrete driveway pressure washed recently. It looked really good for about a week. Then leaves fell on it, and the leaves stained it brown again. All the engineers had to do was look at flat concrete.

concrete is a permeable material, solar panels not so much. If you coat your driveway with a resin cover, the stains will probably disappear every time it rains. But nevertheless, it wasn't a talking point before - of course, with enough observation you can think of all possible failure modes beforehand. Sometimes it's easier to just try things out.

Or they could have just left a square meter outside on the ground for a few months to see how it did. It would have saved millions of dollars.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#155
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it hard to believe they were really unaware. They either overestimated the durability of their devices or were running a quasi scam.

They either overestimated the durability of their devices or were running a quasi scam. I'm leaning toward scam, because if it can't handle leaves, it can't handle anything.

Still, it might be a simple division of labor thing: one group specializes in believing, hard, and pulling in the money, another group says "well, they've got the money, let's try to build the least bad version of this travesty, if we don't take it someone else will"

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#156
post #86

Yes, solar roads were always the answer to the question of "where is the absolute worst possible place to put solar panels". This was 100% predictable.

Could be worse.[1] Remember the schemes for recovering energy from traffic on sidewalks and roads? Pavegen pivoted to collecting info about people walking on their sidewalks, rather than energy. [1] https://pavegen.com/

Talk about ethical whiplash. I feel especially bad for any engineers that joined to make the world a better place then found out they would be designing tracking systems...

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#157
post #122

I never managed to see the advantages of having a solar road compared to just having a normal road with solar panels next to it. Or above it. Or literally anywhere else. In fact I can't think of many areas that still get direct sunlight that would make for a worse place to put solar panels than on the road...

The advantage that people wanted to get is that in the end you also get a road. Roads take up space, cost money to build and maintain. If you build it next to the road the road need twice the amount of space and still require the space, construction and material for the actually road. If you build it above the road you get all the issue of overhead roof on a road (trees that fall on it, wind, height limitation). In a…

> That it currently do not work economically is the issue that the article showcase.

It's more than that. We simply don't live in a world where physics is in favor for doing this.

Many people have done more than back of the envelope calculations to show this simply was a non starter.

Those (people who took money to build ) push this idea are either ignorant at best and dishonest at worst.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#158
post #86

Yes, solar roads were always the answer to the question of "where is the absolute worst possible place to put solar panels". This was 100% predictable.

Could be worse.[1] Remember the schemes for recovering energy from traffic on sidewalks and roads? Pavegen pivoted to collecting info about people walking on their sidewalks, rather than energy. [1] https://pavegen.com/

>Pavegen pivoted to collecting info about people walking on their sidewalks, rather than energy.

Wow. Switching from saving the world, to spying on everybody in it. That's almost a perfect microcosm of how the tech industry seems to have morphed in the last decade.

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#159

It was a failure but I’m glad they tried it. Hopefully something like this comes to fruition and we learn more and more with every iteration. Solar roads are a great idea. Maybe it means it needs daily sweeping with electric vacuum trucks or something but if it’s producing enough electricity then it’s worth it.

> It was a failure but I’m glad they tried it.

Maybe next they could design an airplane out of bricks. Or try using water as an automobile fuel. Or that silly experiment where they tried to make a jet fuel that wouldn't burn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y33N0raKZBo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVyZeSgxmsw

Re: The first solar road has turned out to be a disappointing failure

#160
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They capture the imagination because there are plenty of places you don’t want to build solar panels. Namely places that you want to leave alone for ecological or recreational purposes. If you can take a piece of infrastructure that is pervasive throughout a built environment and give it additional purpose, then you can save on or reduce the land you specify for this purpose. Does it work? Apparently not, or at least…

It's not an experiment that can yield anything or teach us anything if there is no paper and no data. A fraudulent startup maybe.

There's abundant data. some 2 years worth of daily power generation from road installed PV panels. A ~$5mm experiment, that also resulted in a 1km road.

Your local physics department spends x10 that budget yearly, and you can't move your car on the arxiv papers it produces (if any).

P.S - Colas is not a startup https://www.colas.com/

Post reply on HN