US Solar Roadways Plan Hitting Snags

[EZRecovery]

This is REALLY crazy  :o

 

Solar Roadways have raised more than $1 million through crowdfunding website, Indiegogo.  Their idea is an extremely ambitious one of replacing the US nation?s roads with solar panels.  The husband and wife team of Julie and Scott Brusaw, are now past the design stage and will now move from prototype to manufacturing, in what many consider to be a dangerous stage for any technology project.  The dream maybe still is a long way off as the logistics of actually pulling off this project are massive.

 

The project has received two rounds of funding from the Federal Highway Administration and the Solar Roadways team have built a prototype parking lot that is constructed with solar panels, microprocessors, and LEDs,  which are encased in a textured glass.  The firm says it can withstand the weight of a 250,000-pound truck.

 

 

The idea is actually pretty feasible and if the team does pull it off they could replace all the nation?s asphalt with solar panels in the process generate more than three times the electricity the US uses.

 

Solar Roadways? design would filter stormwater, prevent icy roads by melting snow, replace above-ground power cables and light up to warn drivers if a large animal, such as a moose, wanders onto the road.

 

With all these good points, what is there to go wrong?  Well, unfortunately, the list of obstacles is a long one. The main issue is cost. Science writer Aaron Saenz wrote in 2010, when Solar Roadways was first getting national attention, ?Sure, we could pave the streets with solar panels, but we could also pave them with gold?There is roughly 29,000 square miles of road surface to cover. We need roughly 5.6 billion panels to cover that area. That?s a price tag of $56 trillion!?

 

Saenz says the numbers which the Solar Roadways team have used, has overestimated the cost of asphalt.  He thinks that Solar roads are 50 percent more expensive than traditional roads and he is not alone.  Joel Anderson, a business editor for Equities.com, said, ?The Brusaws have been unable to secure any piece of the more-than $2 billion a year spent on solar research and development around the world?Probably because there?s too many more-practical, more-promising investments to be made to seriously consider this pipe dream.?

 

The Indiegogo campaign does not address the cost issue, and the Brusaws are unclear about what exactly the $1 million will buy. ?We need to make a few tweaks to our product and streamline our manufacturing process so that we can make our panels available to the public as quickly as possible.?

 

Most of the technological challenges appear to be solvable. Like how to keep the roads clean, how to increase the efficiency of the panels and how to store the solar power.  The idea seems great, but I think the logistics and pricing issues will snag up the implementation of the project.

 

[image via hashslush]

 

SOURCE: http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/26/5751880/plan-to-cover-roads-with-solar-panels-raises-1-million

[TPreston]

Protip: Reporters who know sweet **** all about engineering and physics arnt suited to question the viability of things like this.

Spoiler alert: its a turd of an idea.

[+Thayios Subscriber²]

Won't happen because money, /end

 

The majority of the interstate and highways here didn't have cable barricades in the middle because they cost too much ($150k PER MILE) until someone died and their mother took an extreme measure of barraging the lazy politicians to actually do something.

 

I have no idea why it costs 150k per mile, considering all they do is bury the cable in cement posts but hey what do I know. It's kind of like those concrete street panels that they usually refuse to replace instead spitting an asphalt spit wad on top creating an awesome speed bump in the middle of the road.

 

MEANWHILE politicians get raises and are spending money at exponential cost on less important things; one day our country will wake up and I hope I'm still alive to see it. 

[DConnell Member]

Protip: Reporters who know sweet **** all about engineering and physics arnt suited to question the viability of things like this.

Spoiler alert: its a turd of an idea.

 

So it'll be the next investment for the Obama Administration's green energy plan aka flushing tax dollars down the toilet.

[rfirth]

I think they should just replace intersections with solar intersections... just to power the lights. And only new intersections. You can't go out and rip up perfectly good roads and put solar roads and expect it to be cost-effective.

 

Solar powered intersections are good because they would still work in a blackout. During a hurricane, for instance, you might be without electricity for 2-4 weeks.

 

Probably better to put the solar panels next to the road than under it, though.
 

[TPreston]

 

So it'll be the next investment for the Obama Administration's green energy plan aka flushing tax dollars down the toilet.

Didn't watch their video to see the republican governor who was duped by it :rolleyes:

[DConnell Member]

Didn't watch their video to see the republican governor who was duped by it :rolleyes:

 

Oh, so it'll be bipartisan stupidity!

[Argi]

The plan isn't feasible, and not pointing solar arrays towards sun as it moves through the sky is a waste.  Don't know why this picked up any steam to begin with.

[+Warwagon MVC]

First off I think they are a really good idea. But what happens when they get hacked and all the roads lines and warning get turned off?

[+Thayios Subscriber²]

http://jalopnik.com/why-the-solar-roadway-is-a-terrible-idea-1582519375/+jasontorch

[TPreston]

The plan isn't feasible, and not pointing solar arrays towards sun as it moves through the sky is a waste.  Don't know why this picked up any steam to begin with.

Because everyone who reported about this in the news knows nothing about science or engineering, Even basic common sense like the above is absent.

Its a sad reflection of our society and the media. 

[ATLien_0]

Great Idea, just never going to happen until our debt is paid off. Also, I would imaging the lobbying between the Coal companies and Nuclear companies would create a political mess

[Astra.Xtreme]

Here's the problems I see with it besides cost:

 

1.  I can't imagine the coefficient of friction of this is better than asphalt/concrete on rubber tires.  It looks like some sort of textured plastic, so when it's wet or icy, it will be a nightmare to retain traction.

 

2.  Many areas of this country get A LOT of snow and it falls fast, so there's no way in hell heating coils will do much to help.  Put a bunch of snow in a bot on your stove and it takes a long ass time to melt off.

 

3.  How well will these hold up in cold weather areas? In winter, roads here get absolutely destroyed in a matter of years due to the pavement expanding/buckling due to ice buildup plus the salt and snow plows constantly scraping them.  Chunks of pavement getting torn up happens a lot and isn't a big deal, but chunks of plastic/metal shrapnel being torn up will be an extreme safety hazard.

 

But yeah, none of those things will even matter since this will never get past the cost stage.

[Sadelwo]

Great Idea, just never going to happen until our debt is paid off. Also, I would imaging the lobbying between the Coal companies and Nuclear companies would create a political mess

 

This is the main obstacle, energy barons who see this as a threat to their income. If roads generate the electricity, you wouldn't need extensive power plants. Also, Hybrid vehicles become a lot more plausible to the masses, meaning oil companies would start loosing sales by a lot. Coal, Nuclear and the heavy hitter Big Oil will be against it.

[LightEco]

Astra.Xtreme, on 03 Jun 2014 - 12:49, said:Astra.Xtreme, on 03 Jun 2014 - 12:49, said:Astra.Xtreme, on 03 Jun 2014 - 12:49, said:

Here's the problems I see with it besides cost:

 

2.  Many areas of this country get A LOT of snow and it falls fast, so there's no way in hell heating coils will do much to help.  Put a bunch of snow in a bot on your stove and it takes a long ass time to melt off.

 

3.  How well will these hold up in cold weather areas? In winter, roads here get absolutely destroyed in a matter of years due to the pavement expanding/buckling due to ice buildup plus the salt and snow plows constantly scraping them.  Chunks of pavement getting torn up happens a lot and isn't a big deal, but chunks of plastic/metal shrapnel being torn up will be an extreme safety hazard.

 

But yeah, none of those things will even matter since this will never get past the cost stage.

 

You wouldn't turn them on to heat after there is a ton of snow already. When snow is coming you'd get them heated up and the snow would melt as soon as it hit them. Take your pot idea and sprinkle the snow in an already heated pot.

 

As for road wear, pretty much all your points would be moot. No snow or ice = no salt and plows plus the materials would mean no cracking and buckling during freezing.

 

Its a cool concept. You could even devise a way to charge electric vehicles as they drive over it. Unlikely we'll see it in mass implementation anytime soon, but perhaps companies or such will start using them in parking lots or private developments.

[EZRecovery]

This is how much US is in debt:

The US Total National Debt currently stands at:

 

$17,555,437,713,940

 

as of April 2014

 

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=united%20states%20debt

 

and it will cost $56 trillion to do it?  :rolleyes: 

[Linkinfamous]

The idea is actually pretty feasible

 

There's no way they have any engineers actually working for them. This is a stupid concept.

 

Dirt and grime alone would turn the efficiency to crap. The angle of incidence is awful. The materials required for durability would necessitate high extinction, repair will be extremely expensive and slow.... 

 

The US has vast areas of nothingness to put solar panels in. We don't need them in roads. It's a stupid, stupid, stupid idea.

[SierraSonic]

First off I think they are a really good idea. But what happens when they get hacked and all the roads lines and warning get turned off?

We'll hopefully all these things are extra indicators and all normal indicators will still remain.

 

 

There's no way they have any engineers actually working for them. This is a stupid concept.

 

Dirt and grime alone would turn the efficiency to crap. The angle of incidence is awful. The materials required for durability would necessitate high extinction, repair will be extremely expensive and slow.... 

 

The US has vast areas of nothingness to put solar panels in. We don't need them in roads. It's a stupid, stupid, stupid idea.

 

Their FAQs show only a 9% drop when really dirty. Durability is already said to be strong and not as weather affected as normal roads. Read the FAQ.

 

 

 

They aren't going to start with highways, they will start with parking lots, sidewalks, and gradually work their way into main roads and eventually highways. Quit acting like the estimated costs of replacing all roads everywhere mean anything when a small scale rollout is more likely to happen than spreading it everywhere from the get go.

 

Also the energy these roads will provide are SUPPLEMENTAL, they are never meant to replace our dependence on other resources, just reduce them. So any loss of efficiency due to the angle of the sun or road dirt are poor reasonings against this idea. As the tech improves I see costs dropping and benefits rising. These roads will basically help pay for themselves, and if weathering protection is truly as good as they say, it will cost less to maintain these roads than current roads.

[Astra.Xtreme]

You wouldn't turn them on to heat after there is a ton of snow already. When snow is coming you'd get them heated up and the snow would melt as soon as it hit them. Take your pot idea and sprinkle the snow in an already heated pot.

 

As for road wear, pretty much all your points would be moot. No snow or ice = no salt and plows plus the materials would mean no cracking and buckling during freezing.

 

Its a cool concept. You could even devise a way to charge electric vehicles as they drive over it. Unlikely we'll see it in mass implementation anytime soon, but perhaps companies or such will start using them in parking lots or private developments.

Well my example of a stove is exaggerated since there's a lot of heat present.  My point was that snow basically acts as an insulator, so once it starts to pile up, it's extremely difficult to dissipate it.  There obviously won't be a boiling surface on these tiles to melt snow quickly.  It's not uncommon for several inches of snow to fall in an hour, so you'd need a lot of heat to keep up.  There's also snow drifting that will cover roads in feet of snow extremely quickly.

 

Here's a few more variables to throw in.  How will it be determined if there is snow falling in an area?  Heating the files will consume (waste) a considerable amount of energy, so obviously it's not a good solution to heat the tiles the entire time.  What about at night when the tiles would essentially have to be fed external power?  In gloomy winter when the sun isn't out and the temperatures can get down to -20F, these things would suck a massive amount of energy to sustain themselves.

 

I just don't think you could make the heating concept work, thus you can't get rid of snow plows and salt.

Obviously none of this is a worry in the deep South, but I'd still be very concerned with traction in the rain.

[SierraSonic]

Well my example of a stove is exaggerated since there's a lot of heat present.  My point was that snow basically acts as an insulator, so once it starts to pile up, it's extremely difficult to dissipate it.  There obviously won't be a boiling surface on these tiles to melt snow quickly.  It's not uncommon for several inches of snow to fall in an hour, so you'd need a lot of heat to keep up.  There's also snow drifting that will cover roads in feet of snow extremely quickly.

 

Here's a few more variables to throw in.  How will it be determined if there is snow falling in an area?  Heating the files will consume (waste) a considerable amount of energy, so obviously it's not a good solution to heat the tiles the entire time.  What about at night when the tiles would essentially have to be fed external power?  In gloomy winter when the sun isn't out and the temperatures can get down to -20F, these things would suck a massive amount of energy to sustain themselves.

 

I just don't think you could make the heating concept work, thus you can't get rid of snow plows and salt.

Obviously none of this is a worry in the deep South, but I'd still be very concerned with traction in the rain.

I'm sure they could just flip a switch instead of making a call to the plows? A person has to make the judgement call one way or another. These unit produce heat normally, so they should already have a better chance at removing snow than than regular roads. I am also sure these systems will have a smart grid where you can enable the heaters on a whole network of roads, or just small sections.

 

I would rather pay to turn on a heater than pay a crew to destroy roads, and pay another to fix them later. Like any solar technology, yes they will have downfalls, but they aren't enough of a reason to not implement them, especially as this tech would be supplemental and not a direct replacement.

 

All that truly matters is to see if the tech can hold up for 5 years with minimum maintenance, and if the savings made during good weather hold up and balance the bad.

 

They are saying the roads cost 50% more to build than regular roads, if they last two years, they already cost 25% less than normal roads as they seem to repave the same roads every year, not including energy savings. Add to that the savings from lack of plows/salt/wages, and a lack of yearly repairs, it seems feasible. The main thing I want to see is how well it holds up for the first couple of projects over the years, such as a parking lot or sidewalks, and then judge if roads are feasible.

[Astra.Xtreme]

I'm sure they could just flip a switch instead of making a call to the plows? A person has to make the judgement call one way or another. These unit produce heat normally, so they should already have a better chance at removing snow than than regular roads. I am also sure these systems will have a smart grid where you can enable the heaters on a whole network of roads, or just small sections.

 

I would rather pay to turn on a heater than pay a crew to destroy roads, and pay another to fix them later. Like any solar technology, yes they will have downfalls, but they aren't enough of a reason to not implement them, especially as this tech would be supplemental and not a direct replacement.

 

All that truly matters is to see if the tech can hold up for 5 years with minimum maintenance, and if the savings made during good weather hold up and balance the bad.

There's still drifting, which will be the biggest challenge.  A heater won't be able to cope with inches of snow being tossed onto it in a short amount of time.  The major highways even get plenty of drifting every year, so it won't be a viable option to just "trust" the heaters to do their thing.

 

In winter when it's constantly cloudy, cold, and snowy, these roads will be a huge net loss due to consuming vastly more energy than they generate.  In the cold states, there will just be too many hurdles and expenses for these to ever be a good option.

[TPreston]

They aren't going to start with highways, they will start with parking lots, sidewalks, and gradually work their way into main roads and eventually highways. Quit acting like the estimated costs of replacing all roads everywhere mean anything when a small scale rollout is more likely to happen than spreading it everywhere from the get go.

 

Also the energy these roads will provide are SUPPLEMENTAL, they are never meant to replace our dependence on other resources, just reduce them. So any loss of efficiency due to the angle of the sun or road dirt are poor reasonings against this idea. As the tech improves I see costs dropping and benefits rising. These roads will basically help pay for themselves, and if weathering protection is truly as good as they say, it will cost less to maintain these roads than current roads.

Why should we believe them ? neither have a background in engineering the only testing they've done is with a tractor little bigger than a childs toy.. once.

 

I'm sure they could just flip a switch instead of making a call to the plows?

And how many years of experience working as an engineer do you have to make this claim ?

 

I would rather pay to turn on a heater than pay a crew to destroy roads, and pay another to fix them later.

Me too, Too bad this wont work.

 

People and the media are just too gullible these days

[SierraSonic]

There's still drifting, which will be the biggest challenge.  A heater won't be able to cope with inches of snow being tossed onto it in a short amount of time.  The major highways even get plenty of drifting every year, so it won't be a viable option to just "trust" the heaters to do their thing.

 

In winter when it's constantly cloudy, cold, and snowy, these roads will be a huge net loss due to consuming vastly more energy than they generate.  In the cold states, there will just be too many hurdles and expenses for these to ever be a good option.

Well again, I don't expect people to be driving fast during these conditions anyway, and the traction is higher than that of regular roads, salt doesn't get rid of all snow, and we drive in mush anyway, I'd expect roads to be comparable when it comes to traction in the snow, if not in favor of these roads with heaters.

 

Why should we believe them ? neither have a background in engineering the only testing they've done is with a tractor little bigger than a childs toy.. once.

 

And how many years of experience working as an engineer do you have to make this claim ?

 

Me too, Too bad this wont work.

 

People and the media are just too gullible these days

Because why would anybody allow an untested technology be rolled out nationwide on main roads? Again, the tech needs to prove itself, and they aren't going with an all or nothing approach, they are going to try it small scale and see if it adapts well to the large scale.

 

They can remotely control traffic lights, I see no need for an engineering degree to solve this issue. 

[TPreston]

Because why would anybody allow an untested technology be rolled out nationwide on main roads?

This hasn't even got that far, It fails at the drawing board for the reasons already mentioned.

 

 Again, the tech needs to prove itself, and they aren't going with an all or nothing approach, they are going to try it small scale and see if it adapts well to the large scale.

Well we already know that it wont again for the reasons already mentioned.

 

They can remotely control traffic lights, I see no need for an engineering degree to solve this issue. 

And you know how much energy it will take to melt snow... How ? And you know how to waterproof the surface of the tiles so that when the snow melts off it dosnt go between the tiles .. Also how do you stop the tiles from tearing this surface apart under the varying load of the car tyre....

 

Oh who needs to worry about that sciency stuff I mean that dosnt mater :rolleyes:

[Astra.Xtreme]

Well again, I don't expect people to be driving fast during these conditions anyway, and the traction is higher than that of regular roads, salt doesn't get rid of all snow, and we drive in mush anyway, I'd expect roads to be comparable when it comes to traction in the snow, if not in favor of these roads with heaters.

They can't just leave roads un-plowed.  Especially highways that are critical to people getting around.

 

Have they actually released any proof about the traction being better than regular roads?  The stuff looks like textured plastic, so if that's the case, it will be massively worse than regular pavement.