So long as they're not trying to put solar panels literally in the road but instead as coverage above the road (blocking rain, snow, sun, etc.) then that sounds great.
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Green Energy
2204 readers
4 users here now
Everything about energy production and storage.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The world at large? Sure.
The US? Fuck no commie eco fascist! That's public money we could be throwing at Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Boeing!
This just in: deserts and parking lots exist and aren't swarmed by high speed traffic.
The benefits of covering highways are more immediately visible (provide shade to cool drivers and reduce blinding by the sun).
I agree those other places have benefits.
Covering deserts will help cool them and reduce evaporation of moisture on the surface, possibly restoring the livability of a more diverse ecosystem. However, panels in the desert get dusty quickly, don't get cleaned by rain often, and would require water be brought in to clean them.
Covering parking lots would help cool cars, but I fear panels would be prime targets for vandalism.
Everything has a drawback, but covering roads and highways panels would be frequently equally as prone to damage ( every time there is a downed tree or fender bender). As for dust, the exhaust fumes of 100,000s of vechiles adds up, and the panels cannot simply be hit with compressed air. The soot sticks to surfaces.
Its nice in theory but actually covering highways in panels would make them disgusting choked tunnels and ruin the panels. Covering the highways at all even with a light canvas to block sun would be prohibitively difficult to make both effective and maintainable.
explores the potential to install solar panels above highways and major roads.
Oh thank god they use that option not replace the road with those horrid solar cells that underperformed in every test.
SOLAR, FREAKING, ROADWAYS!
No no NO no No nO NO. This has been trotted out so many times and every time it fails.
-
Embedded panels do not work it has been tested, even light traffic damages and reduces their absorption capacity.
-
Raised panels do not work in large areas because the oily dirt from the road reduces absorption and requires constant maintenance.
-
Large amounts of valuable equipment easily accessible on the side of the road becomes targets for thieves.
So much human time and energy is wasted on failed ideas.
The idea works great if you stop allowing cars the utilize the space
I would LOVE for America to design and build walkable cities, I would LOVE to ditch my car forever and rely on a robust public transportation system. I HATE driving, and the pollution cars make and YES your suggestion would be a GREAT solution.
Turn 40% of a cities roads into walkable lanes with solar panels. That fixes the ambient dust grease problem, provides significant footage for panels, and makes the environment and social atmosphere more pleasant.
I am fully all for your idea and would donate to any organization that has the capacity and interest to get it done.
Cities are for people, not for cars.
If you read the post you would know it's suggesting a completely different idea than the one you just refuted.
OVER the road and IN the road are not the same thing.
Is this really what the internet has come to? What a fucking disappointment.
This sort of solution is, in reality, just another way for us not to address the root of the problem, which is that car-centric infrastructure is orders of magnitude worse for the environment and even just global warming than whatever benefit solar roadway roofs could provide.
- Cars today mostly burn fossil fuels. EVs are better but are having slow adoption and are still quite energy-inefficient compared to e.g electrified public transit.
- The cars have to have a bunch more energy dumped into them for procuring and assembling the materials compared to public transit.
- Car-centric planning means extremely space-inefficient, sprawling design, resulting in the removal of natural ecosystems that help fight global warming through carbon capture.
- The amount of energy that goes into building such massive parking lots and extensive road networks to accommodate car-centrism has to be unfathomable.
- Car centrism physically makes things more distant from each other, meaning not only is the transit medium itself less energy-efficient over the same distance, but travel distances are much longer.
- There can still be rooftops over above-ground public transit infrastructure, and even a fraction of the space saved on sprawling design could be used for solar farms.
TL;DR: [email protected]
Yeah, this is literally just highlighting the huge amount of land dedicated to cars. People complain about the space used by solar, but a small subset of roads take up as much space as a solar farm that could provide the majority of our energy.
This is one of those ideas that's just constantly claimed and constantly rebuked as unrealistic and not feasible
To be fair, at least in this case it’s looking into putting the panels on a structure above the road instead of the more commonly suggested drive on panel variation. Still pretty unnecessary for most of the world as spare land is something that’s more abundant, but it might be relevant for more space constrained nations and islands where open fields are more expensive than already government owned roadway.
linky?
I'm not a fan of the guy so if you want his channel you need to search youtube but thunderf00t did a pretty decent if heavily sarcastic video, maybe 2, on why current solar panel roads are ridiculously stupid.
ah i think this is solar panel covering as in suspended above the road, not embedded in the road
in india i think they started suspending panels above their canals successfully, i think there are other plans for farms too, that even helps some crops to grow
I addressed raised panels in other comments as well.
They work really well in farm fields, and I'm pretty sure India has already begun installing panels on some farms to test for runoff complications.
Canals is a really good idea as long as the panels can be serviced easily without making them to tempting to steal.
Roadside anywhere will always fall to the problem that if you make something easy to steal by putting it on the side of the road, it will get stolen.
Which is again, not what they're suggesting. This article was about putting the panels above the road
Which is again, why I also covered those in my posts. And since you can't bother to read my replies, I'll make sure I'll never have to see yours again.
I mean. That's dirt cheap in the grand scheme of things.
In comparison to extinction? Yes. In comparison to every other green option including other implementions of solar? No.
Not really, embedded panels crack constantly and need replacement.
Lifted panels get covered in dust and oil and basically need constant cleaning, plus they get stolen at an alarming rate.