Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lightyear One

lightyear.one

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–55 of 55 posts

Re: Lightyear One

#51

Post by dzhiurgis »

ender341341 wrote: post #27
keepquestioning wrote: post #15

Why all the hate to solar panels here?

It's less to solar panels and more to poor use of solar panels and not wanting charlatans to sour solar panels for useful things by trying to scam people with them. For this price you'd be better off buying a luxury ev, getting a new roof on your house and installing solar there. you'd have money left over and be able to actually put a meaningful charge on your car using solar that way.

FWIW the appeal would be for those who can’t get their own roofs (aka majority of worlds population). The price point is likely to capture the initial hype.

Wouldn’t be surprised if the car itself is more like recumbent bicycle - ultra efficient vehicle with solar on top.

Re: Lightyear One

#53

Post by [deleted] »

DennisP wrote: post #25
samschooler wrote: post #8

So it looks like the site pushes solar as a huge benefit but, if you look closer, they are actually being clear its not "unlimited range because sun", its just a boost on top of the plug in charging. Specs say "up to 70km" of additional solar range per day; which I'm assuming is perfect alignment of the sun with the panels for the whole day. So realistically it'd be 10km (or 3%ish of the total plugin range) if its a…

Seems more likely that "up to 70km" refers to a full day with full sun at an ideal location and time of year, not a full day with the car mounted on a solar tracking system. That would roughly match what Aptera is claiming. Aptera has a more radical design, but looks like it might have less panel area.

[deleted]

Re: Lightyear One

#54

Post by margalabargala »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #50
aplummer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t it add weight though? It seems like if the car is parked next to a solar panel and drives away without it then it’s a lot more efficient.

1kwp of solar cells weighs in the order of 10kgs, double for whole assembly, triple for the inverter.

An electric car doesn't need an inverter, it can charge directly off the produced DC.

Nor does it particularly need a "whole assembly" for mounting etc, as it would be built directly into the roof of the car. It may well be that using a solar panel to replace the metal skin of the car will turn out to be equal or less weight than it otherwise would be, though of course much more expensive.

Re: Lightyear One

#55

Post by margalabargala »

aplummer wrote: post #19
margalabargala wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on the specific use case, it may not be terrible. I drive a Nissan Leaf. It gets 5.5 mi per kWh in the summer, 4.8 in the winter. My commute is about 7 miles 1-way. So less than 3kWh used daily assuming I just commute. They have a 1kW solar panel on their car. If I had a car with the efficiency of my Leaf that charged from a 1kW panel every day, it's conceivable that for my specific use case I would rarely…

Wouldn’t it add weight though? It seems like if the car is parked next to a solar panel and drives away without it then it’s a lot more efficient.

Not necessarily. I'm not particularly familiar with the weight of the metal skins of cars, but it doesn't seem obvious that a solar panel is heavier than the metal it would be replacing.

A typical 1kW panel weighs about 40lbs, of which about 9lbs is the actual silicon producing the energy, and the rest is the protective glass, silicon backing, and structural material around the edges. It seems to me that if the panel is specially made to fit into a car roof as-manufacturered in place of a metal roof, a lot of that wouldn't be needed as it would be built into the roof anyway, and the added panel weight would be pretty negligible.

The DC produced by the panel can also be directly used to charge the battery, no need for inverters.

Post reply on HN