What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Driving on Glass? Inventor Hopes to Lay Down Solar Roads (1 Viewer)

Chadstroma

Footballguy
Driving on Glass? Inventor Hopes to Lay Down Solar Roads

U.S. roads paved with glass panels encasing photovoltaics and LEDs would double as a national power grid

By David Biello | October 6, 2009 | 53

A truck tire supporting a 36,300-kilogram load repeatedly traverses an 18-meter stretch of road, day in and day out, rolling up 483,000 kilometers on the odometer at the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DoT) testing facility in Virginia. The goal is to thoroughly challenge any new paving techniques and see how the road surface holds up. Now imagine putting a solar panel under there.

That's exactly what Scott Brusaw of Sagle, Idaho–based Solar Roadways hopes to do next February. The electrical engineer is currently at work building a prototype of his so-called "Solar Road Panel" with the help of a $100,000 small business contract from the DoT.

"We're building solar panels that you can drive on," Brusaw says. "The fact that it's generating power means it pays for itself over time, as opposed to asphalt."

There are about 260,000 kilometers of roadway in the U.S. National Highway System alone, and thousands more in state highways, suburban thoroughfares and rural roads. Could all that asphalt be replaced with a solar technology that would also double as the nation's power grid?

The key to making this work will be the glass: The solar road panel prototype is 1,024 modules—each containing a solar cell, a light-emitting diode and, someday, an ultracapacitor for storage—sandwiched between a layer of some yet-to-be developed glass and a layer of conducting material. "Nobody's tried to drive on glass long-term," Brusaw says.

In addition to needing strength, this glass will be textured to allow tires to grip and water to run off. It will also be embedded with heating elements—like a car's rear windshield—to melt snow or ice. And it will need to be self-cleaning, coping with the grit and grime of an endless procession of tires as well as dust, dirt and other highway detritus. Needless to say, such glass does not exist yet but Brusaw hopes to partner with researchers at The Pennsylvania State University's Materials Research Institute to develop it.

"Glass theoretically can have a very high strength, provided there are no flaws," says materials scientist John Hellmann of Penn State, a glass expert. But "can you keep the proper optical properties to transmit light to the PV [photovoltaics, or solar cell] and still not weather or change with that traffic going over it? … We make some pretty doggone good glass for structural applications but we're not driving trucks on them."

The engineering challenges are immense, adds materials scientist Richard Brow of the Missouri University of Science and Technology, another glass expert. But glass can be strengthened by compressing its surface using special heating techniques or, at a molecular level, swapping ions in the glass itself. Such enhanced glass is 10 times stronger than the conventional variety and is used, for example, in smart phones to withstand the pressures of texting. "Can you go from a teenager's thumb to a truck? That's a pretty big leap, but 10 years ago we didn't think you could make a 15-micron piece of glass for what's relatively rough handling in a PDA," Brow says.

Glass has been used to build footbridges, such as the Chihuly Bridge of Glass in Tacoma, Wash. And new glass ceramic composites with increased toughness have been developed for the photovoltaics industry, Brow adds—but that might boost the price of the resulting panel.

In the meantime, Brusaw is spending $40,000 of the DoT's money to build a prototype from chemically hardened glass panels that can be purchased today. He will experiment with various types of solar cells, from thin-film to traditional monocrystalline silicon photovoltaics, and he will try to strike the right balance between transparency—so the panel works to deliver at least several thousand kilowatt-hours of electricity each day—and road-gripping texture, which will block some of the light. "If you have perfectly clear glass, you get perfect PV efficiency. But [with] perfectly smooth glass, everybody slips off the road," he notes. "Glass manufacturers can cut grooves into the glass in a hatch-type pattern. We'll try various methods and see what holds up."

Cost will be a factor: "The cost to develop a glass that will hold up in the fast lane of a highway? Fifteen [million] to 25 million dollars over three to five years," Brusaw says. "The cost in mass production? About $1 per square foot." The goal is to produce a 12-foot by 12-foot panel for $10,000 that is capable of producing 7,600 watt-hours of electricity daily; it would take roughly six panels to match the electricity demand of one average U.S. home, which use 936 kilowatt-hours per month, according to the Energy Information Administration.*

In addition to requiring a yet-to-be-invented form of glass, solar roadways would need some form of energy-storage capability—whether batteries or some not-yet-devised ultracapacitor. The goal is to create a cross-country highway system that can also serve as an national electricity generator and power grid. And paired with wind turbines to generate electricity at night, Brusaw estimates replacing the nation's highways with his solar roadways could eliminate the need for fossil fuel–fired power plants. "Based on my calculations, at 15 percent efficiency [from the photovoltaics] we produce more than three times the electricity we have ever produced," he says. Even with cars constantly casting shade over the road surface, along with other challenges, "we think we can make enough to meet the nation's energy needs," he adds.

Other companies, such as the England's Invisible Heating Systems, have developed roads that use embedded water pipes to harvest some of the sun's ample energy that also bathes U.S. roads.

The solar roadway will also offer embedded LEDs to illuminate the road and display information, whether the actual traffic directions, such as lane markers, or messages such as "SLOW DOWN." And, should electric cars become popular, powered pavement could also offer recharging stations wherever such panels are installed.

The first test of Brusaw's crystalline vision will be when the prototype is delivered to the DoT on February 12, 2010. And the DoT's challenges will be followed by some durability testing by the inventor with a pickax, sledgehammer and, depending on the prototype's fortitude, guns. Then it's on to parking lots and perhaps fast food restaurants. "Parking lots are much better than going right out onto the highway," Brusaw says. "You have slow-moving, lightweight vehicles. We can learn all the lessons there before moving into the fast lane."
Link to Story
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We need mass use of rooftop panels - especially on huge commercial buildings - or desert projects before going to this extreme.

 
I wonder if phase 1 of this could be done on a parkway type road, where no trucks are allowed?

Of course trucks always seem to be on the parkways, so I realize that it wouldn't work...

 
I'm not sure which phase it is, but they just received a grant from the DOT to replace their parking lot with solar panels. We've discussed this idea fairly well in a different thread, but I don't think it was dedicated to solar roadways, so it'd probably be hard to find in a search.

ETA - I take that back, pretty easy to find in a search. There are more threads under a search of solar roadways, but I think this one is kind of an ironic honda.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We need mass use of rooftop panels - especially on huge commercial buildings - or desert projects before going to this extreme.
It seems extreme, but when you see what other benefits it can bring, it really seems like a no brainer. If the glass can hold up.website

Better link. Their home page is really crap.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
why ?

what is the benefit of having the road be the solar panel, instead of just putting up solar panels somewhere else? it's not like we're running out of space or anything

plus the effect of texturing the glass (and damage to the surface) on photon transmission is huge. if you reflect an extra 20% of photons due to surface roughness, that's bigger than a 20% drop in efficiency. and 20% is probably a generous guess, it's more likely to be 75%

 
why ?what is the benefit of having the road be the solar panel, instead of just putting up solar panels somewhere else? it's not like we're running out of space or anythingplus the effect of texturing the glass (and damage to the surface) on photon transmission is huge. if you reflect an extra 20% of photons due to surface roughness, that's bigger than a 20% drop in efficiency. and 20% is probably a generous guess, it's more likely to be 75%
Good thing they're studying all that.There are a myriad of potential benefits to the road being the solar panel. They discuss a bunch of them on their website. I encourage you to check it out. Follow the second link I posted and click on the topics on the right.ETA - Read "Smart Grid", "Intelligent Highway", "Illuminated Roads", "Snow/Ice Management" and "Traffic Management" for starters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, help me with the math on this one (I make errors too):

A U.S. home uses 936 KWH of electricity a month at $.20 per KWH (a substantially higher rate than most pay) = $187.20 per month

$187.20 X 12 = $2246.40 per year.

If it takes 5.2 of these panels to cover the requirements for this example household @ $10,000/panel (and remember that cost is a "goal"), that is $52,000.

$52,000/$2,246.40 = 23+ years to break even

How long are these panels supposed to last to be economically feasible?

Even at a 10 year lifespan (I think current solar panels have a seven year lifespan), you are paying more than twice the amount for electricity.

 
Okay, help me with the math on this one (I make errors too):

A U.S. home uses 936 KWH of electricity a month at $.20 per KWH (a substantially higher rate than most pay) = $187.20 per month

$187.20 X 12 = $2246.40 per year.

If it takes 5.2 of these panels to cover the requirements for this example household @ $10,000/panel (and remember that cost is a "goal"), that is $52,000.

$52,000/$2,246.40 = 23+ years to break even

How long are these panels supposed to last to be economically feasible?

Even at a 10 year lifespan (I think current solar panels have a seven year lifespan), you are paying more than twice the amount for electricity.
On their "The Numbers" page they arrive at an average 22 year payback using different numbers ($.12/kwh is one). They also state they are planning for panels to last 20 years and they hope to have improvements to reduce the payback to 20 years.Where are your numbers from? Incidentally, $187/month is my average electric bill and that's with a generation rate of $.08/kwh. My delivery rate puts me much closer to the $.20/kwh you used (over during peak hours).

They also state:

Comparing apples to oranges:

For an accurate cost comparison between current systems and the Solar Roadways system, you'd have to combine the costs of asphalt roads, power plants, and power and data delivery systems (power poles and relay stations) to be compatible with the Solar Roadway system, which provides all three.

In addition, there is no way to calculate additional savings such as the reduction in costs of vehicle and health insurance (due to lighted night roads, wildlife avoidance systems, snow/ice removal, etc.). Accidents and the loss of life (both human and wildlife) will be drastically reduced upon the Solar Roadway.

Then there is the whole environmental issue: elimination of the fossil fuel plants will take away about half of the CO2 emissions that are known to be contributing to the climate crisis. Providing a means to recharge all-electric cars anywhere along the roadside will open the door for the elimination of the internal combustion engines, which account for most of the other half of the CO2 emissions. With internal combustion engines now obsolete, our dependency on oil - foreign or domestic - will finally be over with.

Conclusion: for roughly the same cost of the current systems (roads and fossil fuel burning electricity generation plants), the Solar Roadways can be implemented. Unlike current road systems, it will pay for itself over time. No more Global Warming. No more power outages (roaming or otherwise). Safer driving conditions. Far less pollution. A new secure highway infrastructure that pays for itself. A decentralized, self-healing, secure power grid. No more dependency on foreign oil.
Power plants are part of the $.12/kwh, so you can't count them twice. Power delivery is an additional ~$.10/kwh in my area, this is a savings, but I suspect there will be some 'delivery' costs as well. Cost of repairing asphalt roads is a legitimate savings. Data delivery seems to be a minor component, but a legitimate savings if they can truly package this into the system.
 
Okay, help me with the math on this one (I make errors too):

A U.S. home uses 936 KWH of electricity a month at $.20 per KWH (a substantially higher rate than most pay) = $187.20 per month

$187.20 X 12 = $2246.40 per year.

If it takes 5.2 of these panels to cover the requirements for this example household @ $10,000/panel (and remember that cost is a "goal"), that is $52,000.

$52,000/$2,246.40 = 23+ years to break even

How long are these panels supposed to last to be economically feasible?

Even at a 10 year lifespan (I think current solar panels have a seven year lifespan), you are paying more than twice the amount for electricity.
On their "The Numbers" page they arrive at an average 22 year payback using different numbers ($.12/kwh is one). They also state they are planning for panels to last 20 years and they hope to have improvements to reduce the payback to 20 years.Where are your numbers from? Incidentally, $187/month is my average electric bill and that's with a generation rate of $.08/kwh. My delivery rate puts me much closer to the $.20/kwh you used (over during peak hours).

They also state:

Comparing apples to oranges:

For an accurate cost comparison between current systems and the Solar Roadways system, you'd have to combine the costs of asphalt roads, power plants, and power and data delivery systems (power poles and relay stations) to be compatible with the Solar Roadway system, which provides all three.

In addition, there is no way to calculate additional savings such as the reduction in costs of vehicle and health insurance (due to lighted night roads, wildlife avoidance systems, snow/ice removal, etc.). Accidents and the loss of life (both human and wildlife) will be drastically reduced upon the Solar Roadway.

Then there is the whole environmental issue: elimination of the fossil fuel plants will take away about half of the CO2 emissions that are known to be contributing to the climate crisis. Providing a means to recharge all-electric cars anywhere along the roadside will open the door for the elimination of the internal combustion engines, which account for most of the other half of the CO2 emissions. With internal combustion engines now obsolete, our dependency on oil - foreign or domestic - will finally be over with.

Conclusion: for roughly the same cost of the current systems (roads and fossil fuel burning electricity generation plants), the Solar Roadways can be implemented. Unlike current road systems, it will pay for itself over time. No more Global Warming. No more power outages (roaming or otherwise). Safer driving conditions. Far less pollution. A new secure highway infrastructure that pays for itself. A decentralized, self-healing, secure power grid. No more dependency on foreign oil.
Power plants are part of the $.12/kwh, so you can't count them twice. Power delivery is an additional ~$.10/kwh in my area, this is a savings, but I suspect there will be some 'delivery' costs as well. Cost of repairing asphalt roads is a legitimate savings. Data delivery seems to be a minor component, but a legitimate savings if they can truly package this into the system.
The $.20 was an example that I felt was reasonable.The piece you pasted draws a lot of conclusions that border on hyperbole:

No more global warming?

No more power outages?

Reduced animal accidents; do animals go on roads now because they don't have power cells in them?

Capacitance ability, that frankly, just don't exist.

You are forced to make assumptions that I don't know you can make:

Do these roads "wear" less than asphalt?

What extra preparations does the road bed have to go through to support a glass panel?

What about components of solar panel that are not so nice to the environment, like arsenic?

What about the considerable loss of the marketable portion of the electricity produced that is going to power the LED's and the heating equipment?

Will insects be attracted to lights in the roadway thereby attracting other animals, or create a visual hazard; how about the heat?

Is the traction co-efficient comparable to concrete?

The cost to create new equipment to transport and lay these panels.

Now I realize that some of my questions might be ridiculous but no more so than their glossing over serious production issues (like doubling the useful life of a solar panel) and their benefit claims.

One more question: If glass is such a good surface for roads why hasn't it been used to make any, sans solar panels, up till now?

 
The $.20 was an example that I felt was reasonable.

The piece you pasted draws a lot of conclusions that border on hyperbole:

Yes, they have very high goals for these panels. But all of the conclusions are discussed on the website.

No more global warming?

Discussed on the "Global Warming" page.

No more power outages?

Discussed on the "Smart Grid" page, I believe.

Reduced animal accidents; do animals go on roads now because they don't have power cells in them?

Yes, they will still go on roads. But, the cells can detect when an animal, or a pedestrian, or a swerving driver, or a tree is in the middle of the road and draw warnings or detours for cars heading that direction.

Capacitance ability, that frankly, just don't exist.

You are forced to make assumptions that I don't know you can make:

Do these roads "wear" less than asphalt?

Maybe I don't understand the term, but where would there be any asphalt "wear"?

What extra preparations does the road bed have to go through to support a glass panel?

I don't know about extra, but prep seems like it will be far different. For one, I believe they want to include water storage, from run-off, in a tank under the panel.

What about components of solar panel that are not so nice to the environment, like arsenic?

What about the considerable loss of the marketable portion of the electricity produced that is going to power the LED's and the heating equipment?

LED's and heating equipment draw very little power. Do you use your rear window heater in the winter?

Will insects be attracted to lights in the roadway thereby attracting other animals, or create a visual hazard; how about the heat?

This may not have been discussed, but they've minimized the animal danger.

Is the traction co-efficient comparable to concrete?

Yes, that's the plan.

The cost to create new equipment to transport and lay these panels.

Now I realize that some of my questions might be ridiculous but no more so than their glossing over serious production issues (like doubling the useful life of a solar panel) and their benefit claims.

One more question: If glass is such a good surface for roads why hasn't it been used to make any, sans solar panels, up till now?

Because glass is more expensive than asphalt.
It is true that Solar Roadways have very lofty goals. Most they probably won't be able to fully meet. They've been through Phase 1 testing where they built a prototype panel. They've just received a second grant from the DOT where they'll build their parking lot out of Solar Roadways (in Idaho, so they'll be able to test in sub-prime conditions). Phase III might be a 10 mile stretch of road.

Just like their goals, many of your questions require answers. Answers they're still in the process of proving. If they can meet their energy production and life claims and only 1/2 of their other benefits, this seems like a brilliant idea. At the least, it's an intriguing idea that bears evaluating.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.

 
The $.20 was an example that I felt was reasonable.

The piece you pasted draws a lot of conclusions that border on hyperbole:

Yes, they have very high goals for these panels. But all of the conclusions are discussed on the website.

No more global warming?

Discussed on the "Global Warming" page.

No more power outages?

Discussed on the "Smart Grid" page, I believe.

Reduced animal accidents; do animals go on roads now because they don't have power cells in them?

Yes, they will still go on roads. But, the cells can detect when an animal, or a pedestrian, or a swerving driver, or a tree is in the middle of the road and draw warnings or detours for cars heading that direction.

Capacitance ability, that frankly, just don't exist.

You are forced to make assumptions that I don't know you can make:

Do these roads "wear" less than asphalt?

Maybe I don't understand the term, but where would there be any asphalt "wear"?

What extra preparations does the road bed have to go through to support a glass panel?

I don't know about extra, but prep seems like it will be far different. For one, I believe they want to include water storage, from run-off, in a tank under the panel.

What about components of solar panel that are not so nice to the environment, like arsenic?

What about the considerable loss of the marketable portion of the electricity produced that is going to power the LED's and the heating equipment?

LED's and (1) heating equipment draw very little power. Do you use your rear window heater in the winter?

Will insects be attracted to lights in the roadway thereby attracting other animals, or create a visual hazard; how about the heat?

This may not have been discussed, but they've minimized the animal danger.

Is the traction co-efficient comparable to concrete?

Yes, that's the plan.

The cost to create new equipment to transport and lay these panels.

Now I realize that some of my questions might be ridiculous but no more so than their glossing over serious production issues (like doubling the useful life of a solar panel) and their benefit claims.

One more question: If glass is such a good surface for roads why hasn't it been used to make any, sans solar panels, up till now?

Because glass is more expensive than asphalt.
(2) It is true that Solar Roadways have very lofty goals. Most they probably won't be able to fully meet. They've been through Phase 1 testing where they built a prototype panel. They've just received a second grant from the DOT where they'll build their parking lot out of Solar Roadways (in Idaho, so they'll be able to test in sub-prime conditions). Phase III might be a 10 mile stretch of road.

Just like their goals, many of your questions require answers. Answers they're still in the process of proving. If they can meet their energy production and life claims and only 1/2 of their other benefits, this seems like a brilliant idea. (3)At the least, it's an intriguing idea that bears evaluating.
[*]I think you might want to check on the validity of that statement.

[*]This statement, which I agree with, is all you really need to know.

[*]It is an interesting idea, but as far as bearing evaluating, I surmise without federal help that this technology would not even exist; tell me how this business plan would possibly get funding in the private sector?

 
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
 
We need mass use of rooftop panels - especially on huge commercial buildings - or desert projects before going to this extreme.
I agree absolutely in the southwest. Other areas may not be a good fit. You have to take into account things like return on investment and risk of damage etc for other areas.
 
I wonder if phase 1 of this could be done on a parkway type road, where no trucks are allowed?

Of course trucks always seem to be on the parkways, so I realize that it wouldn't work...
What is a parkway?
It is a highway, mostly in the Northeast, that doesn't allow trucks or other commercial vehicles on it and where the shoulders are groomed to make you feel as if your driving through a park-like setting.here

And

here

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been following the adventures of Solar Roadways for several years now because it's such an interesting concept. If the calculations are correct that paving the nation's highways will supply the country with twice over its electrical needs, it's a potential game changer.

Enormous challenges obviously lie(lay?) ahead. Brusaw has to find the right type of glass and get the costs down to $10k per panel. He's getting a tiny fund from the federal government to keep working on these problems and that seems like a very reasonable speculation on our behalf.

We've had several good discussions about the future of automotive fuel and this topic has surfaced in a couple of them. To take things one step further, try imagining marrying the Solar Roadways concept with the South Koreans' Online Electric Vehicle charging system. You'd have a self-powered roadway supplying power to the cars using it.

 
Another thing to factor into the cost comparison is the reduction of highway construction and repair costs. Ashphalt is oil based and getting ever more expensive and I doubt that a highway lane lasts 20 years between replacement. Replacing a 12x12 solar panel has to be a simpler and cheaper process. (to be fair, though, I can't help but wonder what happens when they start to fail -- do you wait for a whole bunch of them to go bad before you send out the crews? or do you replace them as needed? I could see the roads undergoing a constant state of repair as some percentage would always need replacing. What does this do to traffic efficiency?)

Still, it has to be better and cheaper than resurfacing huge sections of roadway at enormous cost like we do now. Again, this guy is getting miniscule money from USDOT, making it cheap and worthwile research to pursue. The upside is huge and the downside chicken feed.

 
'pittstownkiller said:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
+1Why would anyone want to put glass on a roadway. The abuse roads get is incredible. Glass weakens significantly when scratched or damaged. Vehicles will grind dirt into it's surface, scratching the bejeebus out of it. The glass will not just weaken, it will also greatly diminish the ability for light to pass.Why not try to harness the tides energy?
 
'pittstownkiller said:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
+1Why would anyone want to put glass on a roadway. The abuse roads get is incredible. Glass weakens significantly when scratched or damaged. Vehicles will grind dirt into it's surface, scratching the bejeebus out of it. The glass will not just weaken, it will also greatly diminish the ability for light to pass.Why not try to harness the tides energy?
Apparently, there's glass and then there's glass. They may not find or develop glass which overcomes the problems you've detailed. But they might, too.
 
'pittstownkiller said:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
+1Why would anyone want to put glass on a roadway. The abuse roads get is incredible. Glass weakens significantly when scratched or damaged. Vehicles will grind dirt into it's surface, scratching the bejeebus out of it. The glass will not just weaken, it will also greatly diminish the ability for light to pass.Why not try to harness the tides energy?
Apparently, there's glass and then there's glass. They may not find or develop glass which overcomes the problems you've detailed. But they might, too.
I think they're looking for transparent aluminum.
 
'pittstownkiller said:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
+1Why would anyone want to put glass on a roadway. The abuse roads get is incredible. Glass weakens significantly when scratched or damaged. Vehicles will grind dirt into it's surface, scratching the bejeebus out of it. The glass will not just weaken, it will also greatly diminish the ability for light to pass.Why not try to harness the tides energy?
Because if you harness the energy from the tides on this planet, a plankton somewhere will get displaced and the world as we know it will come to an end.
 
'SacramentoBob said:
'roadkill1292 said:
If solar is a goal, why not make it more cost feasible to have homes with the panels themselves? The transmission of power would all but cease to exist as home use their own solar power before tapping into the grid. Make it cost beneficial to have homes rather than tear up the road ways. Nice idea, not too practical and quite possibly a much better way to implement said technology.
:goodposting:
+1Why would anyone want to put glass on a roadway. The abuse roads get is incredible. Glass weakens significantly when scratched or damaged. Vehicles will grind dirt into it's surface, scratching the bejeebus out of it. The glass will not just weaken, it will also greatly diminish the ability for light to pass.Why not try to harness the tides energy?
Apparently, there's glass and then there's glass. They may not find or develop glass which overcomes the problems you've detailed. But they might, too.
I think they're looking for transparent aluminum.
I thought the same thing when I first read this; better find Scottie with the formula.
 
Another thing to factor into the cost comparison is the reduction of highway construction and repair costs. Ashphalt is oil based and getting ever more expensive and I doubt that a highway lane lasts 20 years between replacement. Replacing a 12x12 solar panel has to be a simpler and cheaper process. (to be fair, though, I can't help but wonder what happens when they start to fail -- do you wait for a whole bunch of them to go bad before you send out the crews? or do you replace them as needed? I could see the roads undergoing a constant state of repair as some percentage would always need replacing. What does this do to traffic efficiency?)

Still, it has to be better and cheaper than resurfacing huge sections of roadway at enormous cost like we do now. Again, this guy is getting miniscule money from USDOT, making it cheap and worthwile research to pursue. The upside is huge and the downside chicken feed.
Also, another thing to note is that while we're trying to force the idea into a 20 year payback or throw it out the window, asphalt roads carry no payback.
 
Another thing to factor into the cost comparison is the reduction of highway construction and repair costs. Ashphalt is oil based and getting ever more expensive and I doubt that a highway lane lasts 20 years between replacement. Replacing a 12x12 solar panel has to be a simpler and cheaper process. (to be fair, though, I can't help but wonder what happens when they start to fail -- do you wait for a whole bunch of them to go bad before you send out the crews? or do you replace them as needed? I could see the roads undergoing a constant state of repair as some percentage would always need replacing. What does this do to traffic efficiency?)

Still, it has to be better and cheaper than resurfacing huge sections of roadway at enormous cost like we do now. Again, this guy is getting miniscule money from USDOT, making it cheap and worthwile research to pursue. The upside is huge and the downside chicken feed.
Also, another thing to note is that while we're trying to force the idea into a 20 year payback or throw it out the window, asphalt roads carry no payback.
:doh: Wish I'd thought of that.
 
I wonder if phase 1 of this could be done on a parkway type road, where no trucks are allowed?

Of course trucks always seem to be on the parkways, so I realize that it wouldn't work...
What is a parkway?
It is a highway, mostly in the Northeast, that doesn't allow trucks or other commercial vehicles on it and where the shoulders are groomed to make you feel as if your driving through a park-like setting.here

And

here
That's where we went wrong. She wasn't well-groomed.
 
I read somewhere about the possible use of windows as solar energy collectors. I think I would start there.

 
'bueno said:
I wonder if phase 1 of this could be done on a parkway type road, where no trucks are allowed?Of course trucks always seem to be on the parkways, so I realize that it wouldn't work...
What is a parkway?
When I was in high school, there was a girl we called Merritt Parkway, because she was free, fast, and well-used.
Didn't the Merritt Parkway have a toll back then?
 
'bueno said:
I wonder if phase 1 of this could be done on a parkway type road, where no trucks are allowed?Of course trucks always seem to be on the parkways, so I realize that it wouldn't work...
What is a parkway?
When I was in high school, there was a girl we called Merritt Parkway, because she was free, fast, and well-used.
Didn't the Merritt Parkway have a toll back then?
I think there was one at the Housatonic bridge, but that's where it turned to the Wilbur Cross Parkway, I believe.
 
What about the considerable loss of the marketable portion of the electricity produced that is going to power the LED's and the heating equipment?

LED's and (1) heating equipment draw very little power. Do you use your rear window heater in the winter?
[*]I think you might want to check on the validity of that statement.
They've discussed somewhere (can't find it now) that they only need a small amount of current, similar to the rear window heater in your car.
 
I wonder how the cost of producing these tiles in mass would compare to pouring asphalt. Also, how long before they need to be replaced. I guess you would need to factor in how much electricity can be obtained to have an actual price comparison.

 
Assuming these new technologies are cost effective, what do you think will be Big Oil's (Exxon-Mobil) response to such an initiative? They will not like being phased out. They will have to spend additional millions of dollars (out of many billions profit) to buy the necessary legislative votes to kill such an initiative. No?

 
Assuming these new technologies are cost effective, what do you think will be Big Oil's (Exxon-Mobil) response to such an initiative? They will not like being phased out. They will have to spend additional millions of dollars (out of many billions profit) to buy the necessary legislative votes to kill such an initiative. No?
Eventually, progress becomes too cost effective to be able buy out. I dont think this tech is there yet but Big Oil wont be able to hold it back forever. At some point they will either have to throw all the money they have at competing with it or take on the technology themselves and adapt to change. History shows the companies that adapt stick around and the ones that fight change die.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top