Electric car that charges itself • Hacker News Board

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#371

Post by bobthepanda » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 12:28 AM UTC

onethought wrote: post #367

bobthepanda wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the car's solar panels are not getting any sun under a roof. A car having anything remotely close to useful solar charging requires so many goldilocks conditions to be just right that it's not worth the complexity, and it's better to invest equivalent resources into more practical solutions.

Combustion Engines require so many goldilocks conditions that it is not worth the complexity. Better to invest in more practical solutions: one big engine dragging carriages is vastly more efficient. Just to make my point really clear, This whole thread is generally arguing: Don't do innovative things, because there are other known (non-innovative) things you could do. Cars that charge themselves in the sun is a no b…

That implies that all innovation is created equal and has equal payoffs.

The ICE brought about big gains for its use case even as a prototype; ICE cars don't produce poop and they wear out a lot less quickly than a horse. In comparison, flying cars or amphibious cars never really made it off the ground in a big way, because the "innovation" there resulted in a hybrid machine that did two jobs poorly and impractically, rather than having two specialized machines.

If it is really easy to point out inherent problems, like, say, the fact that most of the surface area on a car is not generally oriented at an angle to the sun conducive for generating electricity, and those aren't problems that would be solved by "innovation", why try to squeeze water from a stone?

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#372

Post by natch » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 12:50 AM UTC

jiofih wrote: post #362

natch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaporware is a thing. As is clickbait. Also false marketing. The engineers don’t always control the marketing. Maybe the commenter you replied to is simply not gullible.

Or maybe not everything is marketing and a cursory search shows you the project is an engineering project backed by multiple universities? No, it must be fake, because it doesn’t fit my own agenda, and I don’t have the time to actually read any of the engineering info. I’ll just use my well-honed common sense to dismiss this totally impractical and stupid idea by physics and engineering grads. Do they think I’m dumb?…

That works both ways.

There are a lot of strong opinions out there based on ignorance.

It behooves one to take things, even so called engineering info you read on a marketing website, with a grain of salt.

BTW even universities do marketing, since you are apparently unaware.

I didn’t see anyone shouting. I hope you can see what is going on here.

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#373

Post by crooked-v » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 1:01 AM UTC

jjav wrote: post #363

crooked-v wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eliminate HOAs and you've destroyed the basic mechanism that makes common maintenance practical for high-density non-rental housing.

You absolutely do not need a controlling HOA just to maintain common areas. My neighborhood considered a HOA for the common park areas but in the end the land was transferred to the city and maintenance is paid via property taxes. No HOA to tell us what flowers we can plant.

So what do you do about townhouses that share walls or homes that share enclosed backyards?

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#374

Post by crooked-v » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 1:05 AM UTC

dheera wrote: post #286

crooked-v wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eliminate HOAs and you've destroyed the basic mechanism that makes common maintenance practical for high-density non-rental housing.

It seems to me HOAs aren't mostly about maintainence, they're mostly about old farts yelling at you for installing a fence or planting the wrong type of flower or using the wrong color of paint. None of that stuff affects maintainence. Those farts shouldn't even be allowed to step on land they don't own. The stuff that actually affects maintainence, I can understand, but participation should be optional by law. If yo…

There's a reason I specified 'high-density'. 'Your' water pipes and electrical conduits become only a small part of the whole as soon as you're looking at townhouses, duplexes, or even just small homes sharing a lot and utility connections.

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#375

Post by onethought » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 1:13 AM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #371

onethought wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Combustion Engines require so many goldilocks conditions that it is not worth the complexity. Better to invest in more practical solutions: one big engine dragging carriages is vastly more efficient. Just to make my point really clear, This whole thread is generally arguing: Don't do innovative things, because there are other known (non-innovative) things you could do. Cars that charge themselves in the sun is a no b…

That implies that all innovation is created equal and has equal payoffs. The ICE brought about big gains for its use case even as a prototype; ICE cars don't produce poop and they wear out a lot less quickly than a horse. In comparison, flying cars or amphibious cars never really made it off the ground in a big way, because the "innovation" there resulted in a hybrid machine that did two jobs poorly and impractically…

Except that panel development has meant that more energy has been generated at wider angles. Battery tech had the advantage of advances in consumer electronics, Tesla (and everyone else) literally just connected laptop batteries together.

The same thing won't happen with solar, it needs active use in novel areas. Cars are out in the sun, why not collect it? Panels aren't exactly a super rare resource, we could and should make piles of these and stick them to everything, it's literally free electricity and basically 0 maintenance.

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#376

Post by 40four » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:15 AM UTC

hnuser123456 wrote: post #307

40four wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. There are cars for the European market, and I don't think we'll be seeing many in the states. My main point though, is that the amount of electricity you can collect from the surface area of a car is very negligible. It's a very ambitious goal indeed. It's not worthless, it's basically free energy so anything gained is good I guess. It just seems there are a lot of people here that seem to think…

I really can't understand your POV. Of course it doesn't mean never having to visit a charger for cross-country trips, which is obviously a dream. It does mean the car adds charge passively rather than losing it, the panels are silly cheap compared to the cost of batteries, and the hardest part would just be integrating them into the body panels, which is certainly achievable. See my other comment in this thread wher…

I hear you. It’s not nothing, maybe I’m ranting too much. It’s cool tech & this company looks to be at the forefront of it. I have an eyebrow raised. I hope they sell a bunch of these cars!

My main POV that I rambled around I guess, is I’m trying to temper expectations. Browsing through this thread, I’m just seeing too many folks who are expecting way too much out of this technology. I’m almost certain it will not deliver on the high hopes most people have for it. Even if that hope is you don’t have to charge on your very short commute.

It’s easy to get hyped up reading the marketing material on this company’s website. The idea seems great to the lay person. But the fact of the matter is when I hear Elon Musk say publicly that he and his team looked into it, & they determined it’s not an idea worth pursuing, I believe him.

Engineers & physicists way smarter than you and me have done the calculations. There is only so much energy you can get out tiny solar panels on a car body. Period. We’re talking about the laws of physics here. Conceptually it sounds amazing, in reality the result is lackluster.

Everyone wants to look at it with ‘best case scenario’ mentality, but day to day it’s just not going to be that effective. Again, not saying it’s nothing. There are some benefits.

But the added complexity of manufacturing? Could it be scaled larger than the 13K preorders they have? What happens when the panels start failing and need to be repaired? What happens when you get in a fender bender and half your ’solar grid’ goes offline, will you be willing or able to pay a specialist to repair the intricate solar grid in your car body?

It’s just a lot of effort and resources that could be focused elsewhere. Everyone is so excited because the concept sounds amazing, but the downsides & complexity are real. I seriously doubt this will power your car even for small commutes.

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#377

Post by bobthepanda » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:22 AM UTC

onethought wrote: post #375

bobthepanda wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That implies that all innovation is created equal and has equal payoffs. The ICE brought about big gains for its use case even as a prototype; ICE cars don't produce poop and they wear out a lot less quickly than a horse. In comparison, flying cars or amphibious cars never really made it off the ground in a big way, because the "innovation" there resulted in a hybrid machine that did two jobs poorly and impractically…

Except that panel development has meant that more energy has been generated at wider angles. Battery tech had the advantage of advances in consumer electronics, Tesla (and everyone else) literally just connected laptop batteries together. The same thing won't happen with solar, it needs active use in novel areas. Cars are out in the sun, why not collect it? Panels aren't exactly a super rare resource, we could and sh…

> Cars are out in the sun

Are they? Cars spend a fair amount of time under things that would block sunlight; there are garages in all sorts of buildings from your bare-bones detached house garage to multistory affairs, and even if they're outside they're often parked under trees, or in streets and lots shaded by buildings. So it makes already intermittent solar even more situational.

In fact, in hot climates, people take care to park their cars in shade, because the last thing people want is for their car to be baking in the sun.

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#378

Post by onethought » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:59 AM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #377

onethought wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that panel development has meant that more energy has been generated at wider angles. Battery tech had the advantage of advances in consumer electronics, Tesla (and everyone else) literally just connected laptop batteries together. The same thing won't happen with solar, it needs active use in novel areas. Cars are out in the sun, why not collect it? Panels aren't exactly a super rare resource, we could and sh…

> Cars are out in the sun Are they? Cars spend a fair amount of time under things that would block sunlight; there are garages in all sorts of buildings from your bare-bones detached house garage to multistory affairs, and even if they're outside they're often parked under trees, or in streets and lots shaded by buildings. So it makes already intermittent solar even more situational. In fact, in hot climates, people…

Zoom in on any satellite shot of a city, or a road... count the cars vs the solar panels you see. Yes cars are out in the sun... lots of them, all the time. The fact the satellite can see it means there is solar energy in that spot, right when that photo was taken. Multiply that by "All the cars outside in the world" and it's a lot of energy. (Even if they are all still plugging in at their destinations as well).

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#379

Post by 40four » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 5:30 AM UTC

hnuser123456 wrote: post #307

40four wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. There are cars for the European market, and I don't think we'll be seeing many in the states. My main point though, is that the amount of electricity you can collect from the surface area of a car is very negligible. It's a very ambitious goal indeed. It's not worthless, it's basically free energy so anything gained is good I guess. It just seems there are a lot of people here that seem to think…

I really can't understand your POV. Of course it doesn't mean never having to visit a charger for cross-country trips, which is obviously a dream. It does mean the car adds charge passively rather than losing it, the panels are silly cheap compared to the cost of batteries, and the hardest part would just be integrating them into the body panels, which is certainly achievable. See my other comment in this thread wher…

To be fair, I said nothing about long trips. You, and many others are suggesting/ hoping this tech will power the car for very short commutes. My point is I don’t believe even very short trips, on average, will be powered by these solar panels. Sure, a fraction of your short commute will be powered, if it is fully sunny & you don’t park in the shade. But there are too many folks here believing that their 10 mile daily commute will be fully covered, and I’m arguing it won’t. Doesn’t mean the tech is worthless though :)

Re: Electric car that charges itself

#380

Post by Rule35 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 6:09 AM UTC

jiofih wrote: post #362

natch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaporware is a thing. As is clickbait. Also false marketing. The engineers don’t always control the marketing. Maybe the commenter you replied to is simply not gullible.

Or maybe not everything is marketing and a cursory search shows you the project is an engineering project backed by multiple universities? No, it must be fake, because it doesn’t fit my own agenda, and I don’t have the time to actually read any of the engineering info. I’ll just use my well-honed common sense to dismiss this totally impractical and stupid idea by physics and engineering grads. Do they think I’m dumb?…

It's not about an agenda, it's about the numbers. The panel isn't big enough to help at all but it's not being billed as "extra supplemental power for the cigarette lighter", but as if it's actually going to propel the car a worthwhile distance for the e-waste it creates.

> I’ll just use my well-honed common sense to dismiss this totally impractical and stupid idea by physics and engineering grads.

Yeah, because nobody on here is a physics or engineering grad. Just us fucking uninformed hackers.

> Do they think I’m dumb? I’ll show them by shouting even louder, and don’t you dare disagree or censor me!

... Yes, I think they do. But yes, you're sure showing us.

> this is sadly the state of rational thinking today

Seemingly. You're mad when people point out scammy products being pitched at the scientifically illiterate. You aren't arguing about back about the numbers, but with an appeal to (some) authority.