Solar FREAKING Roadways!!

[Adam Jensen]

I like his idea at the end with solar rooftops for roads.

Why don't we go ahead and link this again, no one's seen it yet.

[MerinPally]

Guys I was on the internet earlier and found this, CAN ANYONE SAY DEBUNKED

[Forgon]

Guys I was on the internet earlier and found this, CAN ANYONE SAY DEBUNKED

-snip-

This was quite interesting. But this has been linked... on every page, for like the past 5 pages... It doesn't need to be reposted over and over again.

However, it's more of him saying "Looks way too outrageous" than "debunking." Definitely not "debunked" as that would assume there are fallacies attributed to Solar Roadways, to which there are none: i.e. It may be outrageous, but nothing is in fact false with how Solar Roadways are used or to be used.

Really though, there have been people who have point out the outrageousness from contemporary ideas. One could consider paving tens of thousands of roads for almost a century (as it was in the US) a cost and material requirement beyond comprehension (and "outrageous"). But it was done, slow but surely.

Really, this video points out a lot of good points, don't get me wrong, but it didn't "debunk" anything, just showed the monstrous amount of infrastructure that would be needed to achieve such a feat. (beyond some points about traction and cobblestone effect of the tiles)

Again, it's definitely not debunked. It is definitely possible to achieve Solar Roadways, the principle is still very much within the realm of possibilities, albeit I will concede it would likely not be currently economically feasible.

Hell, maybe it won't replace all the roadways in America. But I can still see this being implemented in say Disney World/Land over the concrete surfaces. I can totally imagine Disney Celebrations not only including awesome firework displays lighting up the sky, but also a fantastical light show spread across the ground.

In this way, I'd still love to support Solar Roadways. As again, it likely won't replace actual Roadways, I love to see the technology in Amusement Parks and other areas, as regardless it's a sweet idea.

[mvaliz]

Guys I was on the internet earlier and found this, CAN ANYONE SAY DEBUNKED

[video=youtube;H901KdXgHs4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H901KdXgHs4[video]

nope, as that video was debunked earlier in the thread.

(I think you're posting this as a sarcastic joke, but I honestly can't tell. :P)

[Forgon]

Seriously though,

Do the skeptics still think this wouldn't be awesome for Amusement Parks like Disney World/Land?

Still think, regardless of roads, the idea could be implemented and enjoyed/loved.

[Toosdey]

Neat concept but it's hard to throw support behind without real world testing, which will make people skeptical.

What happens when some jackass does a burn out on the road or has to make a sudden stop and leaves burned rubber covering the panels?
What happens to the road if there is a major accident with something like an 18 wheeler tipping over, how well will the glass hold against the impact? Will the road have to be shut down after the crash is cleaned up to replace broken and damaged panes?
What happens when some jack ass with a crowbar starts smashing the panes for fun or because he is drunk? They might able to hold a car, but that's because the weight of the car is spread over a large area, as apposed to the corner of a crowbar hitting and focusing all the force on a single tiny point.

I really want to support it, but it's equally difficult to see it being practical in such a large scale like they want. Hopefully they can put it to real world use in large enough areas to answer things like this and put minds to ease.

[MerinPally]

I facepalm so fucking hard at both of you.

[nextormento]

awesome for Amusement Parks like Disney World/Land?

Sure. Take out the solar panel thing and it can be pretty cool, actually:

more info here. They are pretty cool people. They sent me some catalogs a few years ago, and they seem very smart serious people.

That's one implementation that delivers on the cool stuff without trying to integrate solar power, cars on top, heating roads and coffee brewing. Unlike the solar roadway, it can host plenty of leds per surface unit. And it's indoors, so they can actually be seen.

[Forgon]

Sure. Take out the solar panel thing and it can be pretty cool, actually:
-snip-

That's one implementation that delivers on the cool stuff without trying to integrate solar power, cars on top, heating roads and coffee brewing. Unlike the solar roadway, it can host plenty of leds per surface unit. And it's indoors, so they can actually be seen.

You just completely ignored my whole idea. You instead, placed the idea "inside" and just made it a giant floor screen.....

A. Outside, to the scale of the whole park would be a wonder to behold. Not some, tiny, inside, game mat to be ogled at.
B. It would do what it can for energy, likely not be completely self-sufficient, but it would help.
C. The fireworks usually go on at Dusk or Night... So LED's in the ground would be definitely "visible" and would make for an absolutely ridiculous show!

Yes, that floor screen is cool. But that's not a wonder, it just a screen on a limited floor.

If the floor was outside, and seemed limitless, then it would be a wonder to look at. And might as well keep the solar panels, because you don't need the pixel density to really show awesome stuff at that scale.

[nextormento]

You just completely ignored my whole idea.
[...]
Yes, that floor screen is cool. But that's not a wonder

I'm not a fan of amusement parks. But I can imagine some people would like your thing too. Different people wonder at different stuff, I guess :].

I think I just wanted to put it into perspective. I think that sports floor does look like freaking tron.

This, however, not so much (not yet anyway):

But ey, if people like it... I'm honestly no one to judge.

[Yvaelle]

That's their working prototype models though remember. The finished product would have a more consistent internal colour (ie. get black bolt-heads, and black circuit-board: then the whole thing would have a consistent black colour). The finished product would likely also flush better - possibly with near-seamless edges.

Edit: Looking at it now, they also have a really inefficient use of space for solar cells in there - a finished product might even use custom hexagonal cells, rather than the Radioshack rectangular cells they have in there - which would give it a much more consistent look as well.

[Cosmic Janitor]

That's their working prototype models though remember. The finished product would have a more consistent internal colour (ie. get black bolt-heads, and black circuit-board: then the whole thing would have a consistent black colour). The finished product would likely also flush better - possibly with near-seamless edges.

Edit: Looking at it now, they also have a really inefficient use of space for solar cells in there - a finished product might even use custom hexagonal cells, rather than the Radioshack rectangular cells they have in there - which would give it a much more consistent look as well.

Their 2nd design where they tried the light gimmikry is hardly better. Now they plan to glue them between two layers of glass and have the LEDs below that. It's also square but I couldn't see if they actually plan to keep that design (would be alot easier to programm though). I doubt though that the light will be better visible than before though (which in daylight is already an issue) these film solar panels also have an even worse efficiency, but they are cheaper (which probably the main reason for using them).

[Supakaiser]

More debunking:

[Deleted]

They made a debunking page to debunk the debunks. http://solarroadways.com/clearingthefreakinair.shtml

[Supakaiser]

They made a debunking page to debunk the debunks. http://solarroadways.com/clearingthefreakinair.shtml

Holy crap, have you read that page? They think LCDs = LEDs and missed a whole bunch of points. One that sticks out is the hardness of glass vs asphalt. That was never the POINT of bringing up the hardness. No one is trying to put solar arrays UNDER asphalt therefore asphalt getting all scratched up does not matter. With glass, it does.

This is hilarious!

Edit --> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7866833

Moar

[Afrospinach]

They made a debunking page to debunk the debunks. http://solarroadways.com/clearingthefreakinair.shtml

I don't think there is a meeting of the minds here. They actually failed to properly address any of those concerns.

False Claim: We picked a really stupid place to put solar panels

Insert segue into everything else but a discussion on why it is actually a pretty bad place to put solar panels.

False Claim: Solar Roadways is going to cost $60 trillion dollars

"We don't know how much it will cost"

False Claim: Asphalt roads are cheap and maintainable

Just because asphalt isn't perfect, it doesn't mean that every hair brained idea that comes along is better

False Claim: we can't afford to heat roads

Just sounds like an appeal to emotion. Why is their system better than anything else? You can already do what they do without the bullshit if it is such an amazing concept.

False Claim: Glass is softer than asphalt

Did we not just have a discussion right here about why the hardness of asphalt is irrelevant? The glass may stand up to wear but they have solar panels beneath them which is kind of the selling point, dirt and grit on the road will scratch it in short order as has been proven. I don't doubt that you can make a road out of glass, whether it is good for what they are doing however, well I will believe it when I see it.

False Claim: You can't see LEDs in direct sunlight

cue the rebuttal by showing leds NOT in direct sunlight, no really, you think they shade traffic lights for fun, do you? These guys a pro.

The more these guys talk, the more I think they are just out for your money. I don't know why this is still being taken seriously.

[mrmsix6]

The more these guys talk, the more I think they are just out for your money. I don't know why this is still being taken seriously.

Well, they've probably invested so much time and money into this that it's going to be impossible for them to just admit it's a dumb idea.

And yes, that was a terrible rebuttal of a rebuttal.

[Yarathir]

Owch.. I saw "naysayers" and "haters gonna hate". I was pretty optimistic before. Then I saw Thunderf00t's videos, and was less optimistic, but still a bit so. Now I'm pretty damn sure they're just out to get money. If not, I apologize to those people, but "haters gonna hate" is just.. eh -- a horrible way to start a rebuttal, which according to people isn't even a great rebuttal to begin with. Well.. that's that for me, guys!

[luc54]

What I am more surprised about is the fact that people believe this is good idea compared to the Chinese high speed railway (which is actually more plausible). Or the fact people also happen to believe we are actually going to get FTL drives. Seems to me people like to believe in bullshit more than actually possible technology.

[Cosmic Janitor]

What I am more surprised about is the fact that people believe this is good idea compared to the Chinese high speed railway (which is actually more plausible). Or the fact people also happen to believe we are actually going to get FTL drives. Seems to me people like to believe in bullshit more than actually possible technology.

People just have no clue about science and tech, which this thread has proven a couple of times.