Yep (Score: 1)
by nightsky30@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 11:49 (#2CM)
Pretty much what I voted for. Also what I donate to...And just in case any new pipers haven't seen it, or maybe you just live under a rock or in your parent's basement:
http://www.solarroadways.com/donations.shtml
http://www.solarroadways.com/donations.shtml
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by zafiro17@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 13:06 (#2CP)
Very cool. My money is on water and energy research - two things we're going to run desperately short of sooner rather than later. Land, too - there's enough of it but this planet is increasingly an ecological catastrophe.
Re: Yep (Score: 2, Insightful)
by kwerle@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 16:23 (#2D1)
just in case any new pipers haven't seen it, or maybe you just live under a rock or in your parent's basement:Or marybe you can do math.
Look, you want solar power? (and you should) Put panels on your roof.
Want solar parking lots? Put panels OVER the parking lot.
Both of these are easy, cost effective, and not experimental.
Solar roadways is an expensive pipedream distraction, not a solution.
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by nightsky30@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 17:21 (#2D2)
an expensive pipedream distraction, not a solution.While I respect your opinion, I believe the same sentiment was shared by some members of society about computers back in the day. If we had stopped using them or trying to innovate when computers still relied on vacuum tubes, where would we be today?
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by kwerle@pipedot.org on 2014-07-10 07:07 (#2E6)
While I respect your opinion, I believe the same sentiment was shared by some members of society about computers back in the day. If we had stopped using them or trying to innovate when computers still relied on vacuum tubes, where would we be today?I guess I don't think there are any real parallels in that analogy. There were very very few naysayers about computers. It was clear to just about everyone that they would serve a purpose. There was a lot of doubt and terrible guesses about how much they would do or what they would be used for.
SolarRoadways solves exactly 2 problems:
* something to drive on
* power
It's hard for me to imagine them solving any more [real] problems. Like -- really hard. I mean, those are the goals, right? Those are the end goals.
There exists N solutions for those 2 problems, for example:
* asphalt
* solar panels (on roofs, over parking lots, etc)
There is no way, at all, that SolarRoadways will ever be price or performance equivalent to either of those. Ever*. By orders of magnitude.
We should invest time and money into existing solutions rather than this non-solution.
* nano-tech will change everything in unpredictable ways. We would do better to invest in that research, for example.
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by bryan@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 18:08 (#2D5)
There is a stupidly long video on youtube about the infeasibility of solar roadways. Although there are a few good points, I'm not really sure why the video goes on to poo-poo the idea for 30 minutes. Or why the dissenters insist that it's a project to convert every inch of asphalt in the world to solar instead of just a few private parking lots. Or why they don't give constructive criticism instead of essentially calling the creators idiots.
Regardless, I can see why people have such a negative view on the solar roadway fund-raiser after sitting through that video.
Regardless, I can see why people have such a negative view on the solar roadway fund-raiser after sitting through that video.
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by zafiro17@pipedot.org on 2014-07-09 18:19 (#2D7)
Hey, so maybe it's not (yet) suitable for entire roadways? Who cares? Maybe the tech will evolve, maybe the economics will keep it feasible for smaller-scale projects - who knows? I'm still glad to see people thinking about the future.
I've spent most of the last 20 years living and working in developing countries. Life in most of these places consists of:
I've spent most of the last 20 years living and working in developing countries. Life in most of these places consists of:
- poor power reliability, usually generated by burning diesel - the single most expensive and ecologically unfriendly solution out there
- concrete buildings (houses, offices) with zero insulation, with window A/C units to keep the temperature down: huge energy consumption, and concrete has no natural insulation properties; it's ridiculous
- water pollution, total unreliability of the water quality and frequent water shortages
- ecological catastrophes in the making, especially decimation of fisheries or deforestation
- douchebag politicians insisting this is the fault of (a) colonial powers or (b) regional superpowers
- same douchebag politicians putting their full effort into getting internationally funded 'donated' projects to cure their ills.
Re: Yep (Score: 0)
by Anonymous Coward on 2014-07-09 22:22 (#2DP)
Hey, so maybe it's not (yet) suitable for entire roadways? Who cares? Maybe the tech will evolve, maybe the economics will keep it feasible for smaller-scale projects - who knows?I think few rational people will argue that there would not be benefits from that research. Rather, that there are other areas that would provide a better return.
Re: Yep (Score: 1)
by koen@pipedot.org on 2014-07-10 00:01 (#2DV)
An even longer video, by EEVblog doing the maths.
His conclusion: under ideal circumstances it is not feasible, and circumstances will not be ideal.
His conclusion: under ideal circumstances it is not feasible, and circumstances will not be ideal.