# Solar FREAKIN' Roadways



## LemursGT (May 29, 2014)

My $.02: This is an outrageous idea that even the inventors don't take seriously, but because it is outrageous, it's BRILLIANT as a marketing awareness tool to bring money and attention to their company and technology. It is brilliantly executed (SOLAR! FREAKIN! ROADWAYS!) and that awareness can pave the way for ACTUAL usage of their invention.

High traffic roadways will never be suitable for the solution as they've proposed it, for reasons others have laid out. Mostly: Because physics. That said, in low-traffic environments it could be prove cost effective and beneficial. Low-speed driveways, parking lots, etc could provide localized power at an upsell cost over simple repaving. With the right financing and service plans, this could work nicely. Think about how under-stressed residential driveways are. Seems like a potential application, no? With the right cost improvements, it could prove an interesting way of supplementing power generation via under-utilized spaces, just like many residential solar installations are doing now.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

If you really want to find a way to use roads to help fight global warming the best thing to do is to just paint them all white. Everyone is always trying to look at reducing CO2, but reflecting light away from the earth is just as effective.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_LemursGT
_
It's brilliant in concept, but it could require enormous energy to implement, maintain; then there's the fact that as I described, it could be used as a surveillance nightmare.


----------



## LemursGT (May 29, 2014)

RobynC said:


> @_LemursGT
> _
> It's brilliant in concept, but it could require enormous energy to implement, maintain; then there's the fact that as I described, it could be used as a surveillance nightmare.


Agreed. That's why I think small private installations are the place where it actually has some promise. A home driveway or a Target parking lot are reasonable physical environments in comparison to a real roadway, assuming they can bring the costs into line. THAT is a much less sexy viral internet campaign than "SOLAR! FREAKIN'! ROADWAYS!" ...which is why I think it's just a smart smokescreen, despite their protests otherwise.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@LemursGT

1. People already have solar panels on roofs.

2. Using solar panels in a private lot sound promising but the surveillance aspect is present -- it's inescapable actually


----------



## LemursGT (May 29, 2014)

RobynC said:


> @LemursGT
> 
> 1. People already have solar panels on roofs.
> 
> 2. Using solar panels in a private lot sound promising but the surveillance aspect is present -- it's inescapable actually


1. Yes. I don't see why that excludes road surfaces.
2. I don't see how or why? Unless you mean specifically the communications and road-powering-vehicles aspect? In which case, I agree, but I think that's nonsense in the short term. When I meant practical, I meant strictly in the same fashion as rooftop panels are used now. Local power generation, fed directly into a nearby building and then into the grid. No communications, no power-to-vehicle transmission... just good old electricity.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Parking lots are full of cars though creating a barrier between the sun and the panels.


----------



## ALongTime (Apr 19, 2014)

Cost doesn't strike me as such a big issue, because these things come down in price, especially with mass production on this kind of scale.

The main problems from what I've heard are safety. They might well be able to withstand heavy loads but the tread on the surface could still wear down and individual tiles could work their way loose.

Your country would be better to invest more in railways and other public transport as a means of saving energy and cutting emissions, and that would have a lot of other benefits as well.


----------



## CaptSwan (Mar 31, 2013)

It doesn't seem viable... It's too impractical, given the diversity of road styles there are in the US. Not to mention the amazing screw up there'd be if something happened and damaged a huge chunk of panelled road.


----------



## LemursGT (May 29, 2014)

Stelliferous said:


> Parking lots are full of cars though creating a barrier between the sun and the panels.


Not the drive paths between...after all vehicles have to navigate around the lot. Also, not for the entire day in most lots. There are peaks and valleys, and often entire sections that go mostly unused simply because they overestimated demand or had enough space to not worry about it. (Ever see a mall parking lot in Texas? Lots of unused space, lots of sun.)


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_LemursGT_



> Yes. I don't see why that excludes road surfaces.


Technically it doesn't, any flat surface could be used: However the fact that this system requires an elaborate computer network to control it seems frankly overly complicated and would be a major issue in the event of implementing it and, also in terms of large-scale maintenance which periodically happens on roads.



> I don't see how or why? Unless you mean specifically the communications and road-powering-vehicles aspect?


Well a photovoltaic cell itself would not, but this system specifically calls for several things: Pressure sensors, LED's, and an elaborate internet-communications system

Pressure sensors can be used to track people _(even for the same shoe-size, every individual has a slightly different weight distribution. There is also the issue of stride length, gait and so on)_; LED's can be easily configured to actually pick up sound as crazy as that sounds (read page 1)



> When I meant practical, I meant strictly in the same fashion as rooftop panels are used now. Local power generation, fed directly into a nearby building and then into the grid. No communications, no power-to-vehicle transmission... just good old electricity.


That idea is practical; the problem is that this system is a package deal.


@_ALongTime_

The high-speed railway isn't such a bad idea as almost every other nation have maglev trains: I think some ideas are somewhat foolish such as a system which involves a vacuum tube for the trains to run in. 

Of course on paper it's a good idea as there's no air-resistance but the fact is that it results in the need to pump out huge volumes of air in tunnels and maintaining vacuum; furthermore there's the issue of depressurization which would effectively kill everybody onboard (it would effectively be like being in space).


----------



## ALongTime (Apr 19, 2014)

RobynC said:


> @_ALongTime_
> 
> The high-speed railway isn't such a bad idea as almost every other nation have maglev trains: I think some ideas are somewhat foolish such as a system which involves a vacuum tube for the trains to run in.
> 
> Of course on paper it's a good idea as there's no air-resistance but the fact is that it results in the need to pump out huge volumes of air in tunnels and maintaining vacuum; furthermore there's the issue of depressurization which would effectively kill everybody onboard (it would effectively be like being in space).


I didn't mention anything about maglev trains, did you mean to respond to me? Currently only China, Japan and Korea have them, to my knowledge.

Actually what I meant was a more comprehensive public transport infrastructure; trains, buses, etc. That seems to be what's really lacking in America having been there (although I'm not American, so this is just an outsider's take on it), although most countries in general could do with more. That way you could slowly remove the need for cars at all, and it would ultimately be much cheaper, cleaner, and more efficient, and not to mention the benefits of significantly reducing traffic (good for both safety and aesthetic reasons). I'm not necessarily talking about high speed trains, but a high speed rail network linking major cities would also reduce the need for air travel.


----------



## LemursGT (May 29, 2014)

RobynC said:


> That idea is practical; the problem is that this system is a package deal.


Ah, we're actually in agreement then. I've always assumed the massive impracticality of their plan meant that they'd naturally abandon a lot of pie-in-the-sky stuff and focus on the packaging and durability for the kinds of installation I was talking about. If they DON'T do that, they'll just fail very quickly. It'd be like SpaceX approaching private space launches by starting with a colonization mission to Mars.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@ALongTime



> I didn't mention anything about maglev trains, did you mean to respond to me?


Yes, I didn't type your name in?



> Currently only China, Japan and Korea have them, to my knowledge.


Well I meant high-speed train systems like bullet-trains. I thought they were all maglev powered for some reason (I know next to nothing about trains)



> Actually what I meant was a more comprehensive public transport infrastructure; trains, buses, etc.


I understand what you mean



> I'm not necessarily talking about high speed trains, but a high speed rail network linking major cities would also reduce the need for air travel.


The problem I could see is that the amount of security required for the train-stations would end up going up. It's bad enough that TSA does have people at some train-stations... having them at all of them in huge numbers is a very bad idea.

Thousands Squeezing Asses


@_LemursGT_



> Ah, we're actually in agreement then. I've always assumed the massive impracticality of their plan meant that they'd naturally abandon a lot of pie-in-the-sky stuff and focus on the packaging and durability for the kinds of installation I was talking about.


Nope... it's a package deal which is both impractical and dangerous.


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> If you really want to find a way to use roads to help fight global warming the best thing to do is to just paint them all white. Everyone is always trying to look at reducing CO2, but reflecting light away from the earth is just as effective.


Probably a stupid question, but...why not actually do this? As long as a little logistical finagling is done beforehand it sounds like it could be much more viable than the thread topic.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

ScientiaOmnemEst said:


> Probably a stupid question, but...why not actually do this? As long as a little logistical finagling is done beforehand it sounds like it could be much more viable than the thread topic.


I'd imagine it has a lot to do with NIMBYism. People always seem to be in favor of making energy companies more efficient but they are much more opposed to anything that directly affects their lives. White pavement would be a pretty big change, especially to the aesthetic of a city. It's also important to note that cities are usually a few degrees hotter than the surrounding area due to the "heat island" effect of all of the black pavement soaking up the suns energy. This not only makes the earth hotter in general, but it means that people living in cities have to run their AC more due to the higher temperatures which means more CO2. Painting stuff white is one of the easy, cheap things people can do to stop global warming, but I'm not sure people would be as inclined to buy new houses with white roofs for an example. A lot of changing that has to do with PR. People by hybrid cars because they have good PR even though they have little net reduction in CO2 (they produce less, but the electric motor and batteries take more to make), if the same sort of positive PR went into white roofs and white roads I think they would be adopted.


----------



## ALongTime (Apr 19, 2014)

RobynC said:


> The problem I could see is that the amount of security required for the train-stations would end up going up. It's bad enough that TSA does have people at some train-stations... having them at all of them in huge numbers is a very bad idea.
> 
> Thousands Squeezing Asses


I'm not sure what you mean by security required going up. Certainly in Europe there's not much noticeable increase in security on high speed rail lines if that's what you mean. What's TSA?


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@ALongTime

TSA: Transportation Security Admiinistration


----------

