Huh? Who said anything about that? There would be storage batteries in the roadside conduit to smooth out the energy flow. Why would cars have to stop to change the batteries? Sure, the batteries would have to be replaced occasionally, but that would be done by work crews when necessary. I’m not defending the solar roadways idea, I just don’t understand this objection.
This. Too many things to go wrong with it. Start with roofing tiles.
Saying we should put solar on rooftops first is like saying we should postpone space exploration until we feed the poor. That’s ridiculously naive. Feed the poor in the US and you’re liable to get voted out of office. Encourage rooftop solar and you’re liable to run into all kinds of conservative resistance. You might as well ask yourself why you yourself haven’t gone all rooftop solar.
Here’s a Motley Fool article talking a little bit about solar grid parity.
Expect all sorts of resistance and excuses.
Anyway, it’s easier for cities and large private orgs to get parking lots converted than it is to get private homeowners to go rooftop solar.
I’m not sure this sentence makes any sense. Rooftop solar is available for a phone call; my town is one of many now pushing hard for the grid-connected, lease-back solar arrays on private homes. It’s simply too expensive for most homeowners to consider, no matter what the long-range payback. Only with these kind of half-assed, brokered, leased arrangements can or will most homeowners consider it.
Probably even easier to get cities and private organizations to install rooftop solar than convincing them to tear up all their roads and parking lots and replace them with solar roadways. I’d rather see a city spend money putting rooftop solar on all the city offices, libraries, hospitals, schools, police/fire stations, rec centers, city utilities, etc then see them spend an equivalent amount on a much smaller roadway footprint.
Why not both?
Because one is considerably more cost effective – and probably more all around effective since you don’t have cars parking on your solar panels blocking the light and less buildings/trees shading them.
The FAQ has been linked to multiple times. I’m not going to keep linking to the relevant answers in the FAQ. “Won’t cars block all the light?” The answer is no.
Parking lots are already being covered… by solar roofs.
People are desperately trying to find ways to make solar roads make sense because their seduced by the concept but it’s ridiculous, there’s no way to make solar roads make sense. Anything a solar road can do, a solar roof can do better.
Does it say anything about how much light you can block with a straw man? I never said all the light. What they show is a couple pictures of highways rather than photos of parking lots which is what we were talking about in getting cities to convert surfaces. What they answer is for an “overall” system that assumes all paved surfaces converted to solar roadways. In fact, look at the parking lot in the photo they show for highways and it’s considerably more covered on a per sq ft basis. 100% covered? No, no one ever made that claim. A hell of a lot more covered than a rooftop gets? You know it.
Feel free to not keep linking the “relevant” answers though.
We’ve got rooftops and sidewalks, parking lots and roads etc. Why should it be either or? Why should it be, “let’s do one first?” You can’t put roofs over roads, and there are lots of reasons people don’t bother putting solar on roofs. It’s all available land area. People aren’t being “seduced.” Ideas for utilizing our empty spaces for energy production have been around for a long time. It isn’t fusion tech.
Because one is much more cost effective and efficient so it makes more sense to focus on that than scattering resources over multiple routes of varying efficiency and increased cost. When all the roofs are covered, you move on the Phase II.
OK, let’s play, Where’s Waldo?
It would be utter chaos to tear up any major city’s highway system to install something that will see a massive reduction of light 3 times a day during rush hour traffic.
It’s a bad idea in search of tax dollars that will never exist. We’re 17 trillion in debt Federally and state debt isn’t any better.
What does make sense are roofing tiles that are cost efficient to install. the key word is cost efficient. It cost me $5K to roof my house with 30 year shingles. If I could spend $10K for 30 year shingles that returned $6000 in electricity then it’s viable.
No, it’s not. It’s like saying we should postpone going to the moon until we can put a man in orbit. Get the tech and engineering bugs worked out on something simple before you use that same tech on something more complicated. It’s not naive, it’s just sound design philosophy.
The only thing the idea has going for it is that we are going to continue to have some enormous amount of our landscape covered by roads and parking lots for the foreseeable future. Everything else is trying to hammer two completely contradictory elements into the same box, with questionable value even if the enormous engineering and cost issues are resolved. It’s not going to save the planet. It’s not even going to make a big dent as an energy source, given the inherent limitations of all solar. It’s just a university “idea campus” brainstorm that seems within reach in the groovy, controlled-environment, funding-what-funding world of such centers. Minimize the obvious problems, wish away the larger ones, pretend cost isn’t an issue… and take another hit on the doobie before you ride your bike back to your studio apartment just off campus.
Sorry; I lived a good part of my life near one of the premier such “idea factory” universities and learned to recognize the warning signs long ago.
Me, I think there’s more future in mash-ups such as edible firearms, floating bathtubs, battery-powere candy and wind-powered toilet paper than in “solar roadways.”
Um, yeah, and if a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his ass a-hoppin’. Even after decades of engineering investment, practical solar electric cells haven’t come down much in cost per watt. Nowhere near the orders of magnitude needed for truly widespread use on a cost-effective basis, even without semi traffic atop them.
Speaking of the half-assed, brokered, leased arrangements - apparently a lot of homeowners who entered into those are finding that it seriously interferes with their ability to sell their houses, since the lessee places a lien on the house which has to be cleared before the house is sold.
Okay, let’s play “you should read the FAQ whack a mole.” Despite the video in my OP’s rah-rah let’s do this! theme, the inventors aren’t saying we should rip up all our roads and just “do this thing!” Raise some money and test it. Start small, in southerly locales that don’t need heating systems. See if it works. If if does work, it still doesn’t involve ripping up all our roads. They suggest using existing roads as the foundation. Roads need to be repaired and upgraded once in awhile anyway. If it doesn’t work in heavy rush hour areas then don’t put it there. It’ll have been tested for years in other areas first. No one is saying we should spend a trillion dollars on what might be a hair brained idea right now. You do realize crowdfunding isn’t the same as spending tax dollars that will never exist, right?
Roofing tiles make sense, but what do you want? The government to make them mandatory? LOL.
No, I want the government to put them on the buildings they own before screwing around with solar roadways. Either way, it’s the government doing the spending but one way is much more efficient in both cost and output.
To be fair, we’ve already cracked the floating bathtub. It’s even in production, which means there is a factory somewhere that makes floating bathtubs all day.
The future is now.
Also, there’s battery powered candy.
We truly live in a technological wonderland.