They had a goal of $1 million in funding by May 31st.  They reached that goal today!

That should pay for about 400 feet of roadway.

Too slippery, prone to breakage, insanely expensive to install and maintain.  Did you see that guy crawling through a tunnel with all the support wires etc?  Your basically building a road and adding a concrete tunnel, lots of wiring, and placing tempered glass solar panels on top.  Asphalt and concrete highways take insane amounts of pummeling.  I just don't see it holding up except in light usage areas.

From what I saw it pays for itself in the energy it produces and resales.

I think it's further proof of the insane lengths we'll go to in order to think that create a world in which private automobiles for everyone, all the time, can be an environmentally sustainable transportation system.

 

FTFY.

 

ETA: I'm not sold on the technology, but I'm not writing it off before ever seeing it in action, either.  On JSkinner's points, everyone sees the word "glass" and automatically thinks "fragile," but there are some glass-type crystal compounds out there that are extremely solid--at least as much so as asphalt.  From the video, they're also aware of the possible slipperiness issue and so they've made the surface non-smooth (looks like slightly pebbled) in order to add traction.  I can understand the possible follow-up concerns with that not absorbing as much sunlight into the circuits below, but these people seem to understand the challenges.  Even if they can't make it work, someone else with deeper pockets might pick it up and run with it once the original folks can't anymore.

It seems like a well thought out, logical, workable, and smart solution.  Putting this into action shift a LOT of big money industries around though.  This could end up like the electric car...a good idea that won't happen unless it make the people with money more money.  I don't know why they're wasting their time on a Kickstarter campaign when they should be marketing it to roadbuilders as a new cost-saving material.

1 good volcano or nuclear winter & you'd be toast.

Think, McCarthy's book, The Road.

I'd still like to use these on my driveway, though...

If we were in a nuclear winter, do you really think the type of material we use on our roadway would matter?  We'd have much bigger issues to deal with.

Like the wheel on your grocery cart going wonky?

1 good volcano or nuclear winter & you'd be toast.

 

Hah!  I'm going to post this on every "{n} Developments" and Transportation thread.

What does everyone think of this?

http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put panels above the roads? The panels wouldn't have to be as sturdy (but some kindof frame would be) and in bad weather they'd keep a lot of the rain/snow off the road.

1 good volcano or nuclear winter & you'd be toast.

 

Hah!  I'm going to post this on every "{n} Developments" and Transportation thread.

 

Or the "Peak Education" thread.

What does everyone think of this?

http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put panels above the roads? The panels wouldn't have to be as sturdy (but some kindof frame would be) and in bad weather they'd keep a lot of the rain/snow off the road.

It might be cheaper, but it wouldn't do anything for reducing the carbon footprint that results from the traditional way of making a road.  Also, any frame created would suffer the same fate as any other roadside post.  One good accident and you would totally disable that stretch of road.  Keeping the wiring underground and constructing the solar panels to be 'plug-n-play' would minimize an accidents impact.

 

I just think this is a really cool idea that makes me wish I had an engineering degree.  The number of jobs this could create is huge!

1 good volcano or nuclear winter & you'd be toast.

 

Hah!  I'm going to post this on every "{n} Developments" and Transportation thread.

 

Or the "Peak Education" thread.

Am I wrong?

1 good volcano or nuclear winter & you'd be toast.

 

Hah!  I'm going to post this on every "{n} Developments" and Transportation thread.

 

Or the "Peak Education" thread.

Am I wrong?

 

You're not wrong, but the problem is that you're right...for every single project on the face of the earth.  Aside from a few random NASA projects, absolutely no projects are engineered to handle a nuclear holocaust.

What does everyone think of this?

http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put panels above the roads? The panels wouldn't have to be as sturdy (but some kindof frame would be) and in bad weather they'd keep a lot of the rain/snow off the road.

It might be cheaper, but it wouldn't do anything for reducing the carbon footprint that results from the traditional way of making a road.  Also, any frame created would suffer the same fate as any other roadside post.  One good accident and you would totally disable that stretch of road.  Keeping the wiring underground and constructing the solar panels to be 'plug-n-play' would minimize an accidents impact.

 

I just think this is a really cool idea that makes me wish I had an engineering degree.  The number of jobs this could create is huge!

 

I agree.  This makes sense and would be an improvement in every possible way...but it's not going to happen unless we get the auto and roadbuilding lobbies thinking it's a good idea.  These two engineers admit they don't know anything about marketing.  Well, I can tell you that if you want this to happen publicly and built by municipalities, it's going to take a heck of a lot more than a $1 million Indiegogo account to make it happen. 

What does everyone think of this?

http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put panels above the roads? The panels wouldn't have to be as sturdy (but some kindof frame would be) and in bad weather they'd keep a lot of the rain/snow off the road.

It might be cheaper, but it wouldn't do anything for reducing the carbon footprint that results from the traditional way of making a road.  Also, any frame created would suffer the same fate as any other roadside post.  One good accident and you would totally disable that stretch of road.  Keeping the wiring underground and constructing the solar panels to be 'plug-n-play' would minimize an accidents impact.

 

I just think this is a really cool idea that makes me wish I had an engineering degree.  The number of jobs this could create is huge!

I don't see this being constructed with a smaller or even equivelant footprint than a traditional road.

What does everyone think of this?

http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just put panels above the roads? The panels wouldn't have to be as sturdy (but some kindof frame would be) and in bad weather they'd keep a lot of the rain/snow off the road.

It might be cheaper, but it wouldn't do anything for reducing the carbon footprint that results from the traditional way of making a road.  Also, any frame created would suffer the same fate as any other roadside post.  One good accident and you would totally disable that stretch of road.  Keeping the wiring underground and constructing the solar panels to be 'plug-n-play' would minimize an accidents impact.

 

I just think this is a really cool idea that makes me wish I had an engineering degree.  The number of jobs this could create is huge!

 

I agree.  This makes sense and would be an improvement in every possible way...but it's not going to happen unless we get the auto and roadbuilding lobbies thinking it's a good idea.  These two engineers admit they don't know anything about marketing.  Well, I can tell you that if you want this to happen publicly and built by municipalities, it's going to take a heck of a lot more than a $1 million Indiegogo account to make it happen. 

 

Actually, I think they have the right idea to start with: If I read it correctly, they're starting by targeting large parking lots, not actual roads.  That looks like a good way to avoid trying to go straight for the highway lobby and the slice of the government pie that it feels perennially entitled to.  After all, even if this could go national eventually, it certainly wouldn't be overnight.  I was thinking that a big box store with a massive parking lot could get a decent amount of use from something like this.  Most days of the year other than Black Friday, their lots are not so covered with cars as to block out much sunlight.  (I also used to wonder why they never thought to put solar panels on top of their massive roofs, but then I learned that most big box stores don't actually have the necessary structural support for all that extra weight ... think about it, you very seldom see support columns in the middle of a big box's interior.)

(I also used to wonder why they never thought to put solar panels on top of their massive roofs, but then I learned that most big box stores don't actually have the necessary structural support for all that extra weight ... think about it, you very seldom see support columns in the middle of a big box's interior.)

Ikea actually do put solar on the roofs of most of their stores and Walmart has done so on a few of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roads_Must_Roll

Why solar roadways are not viable:

 

baloney

Why solar roadways are not viable:

 

 

I just sat through all 28 minutes of that and can safely say this this is one of the most unscientific analyses I've seen in a very long time.  He sounds afraid of the technology, which is annoying because we all know that the asphalt industry is not about to just shutter their operations and instantaneously repave all of the streets in the country...yet somehow that's his biggest protestation.  No one, not even the inventor, is suggesting that we repave all of the roadways in the country immediately, suddenly bankrupting the country.  DUH...new technologies always start off in small tests and then refined before becoming mass produced.  These tiles sound like a great solution for slow speed areas like town centers or pedestrian zones.  Do people really think that the purpose of the Indiegogo campaign is to lobby the FWHA?  Of course it's not.  It's to try and get some small corporate business to become test subjects in low-risk areas. 

Sorry if the video sucks... TBH I didn't watch it; I just thought it might add to the discussion here. Should I edit the post and remove it?

Haha, don't delete it. It's relevant toward the conversation. Just because I think the guy is an narrow minded idiot doesn't mean others will.

I got through just under half of it; I tuned out when he started going on about being an astronomer (that kind of personal objection doesn't hold much weight with me ... light pollution would be a small price to pay for energy security).

 

But the cost concerns seem justifiable, and the concerns about the disparate impact of rolling weight across a network of tiles vs. a single, smooth(ish) surface seem like they at least deserve to be taken seriously, even if they might ultimately be addressed.  And I agree with him that safety is priority #1 and that even if these could generate significant amounts of energy over time and survive impact, that does no good if the traction doesn't hold up in highway conditions, particularly wet.  There are other places to put solar panels--more traditional places--that won't risk increased vehicle accidents.

 

I also find it at least somewhat credible that even rough-surfaced glass will prove to be slipperier when wet than asphalt.

 

That said, it's pretty obvious from the video that he hasn't actually had any opportunity to do testing on actual samples of these solar tiles, so he's talking just in general terms about the properties of glass and the way vehicle weight pushes on any surface beneath it.

 

Another concern I had (maybe he got to it later, but like I said, he seemed to be ranging further off-topic towards the middle of the video and I stopped watching) is regarding the results of any breakage even if breakage is infrequent.  Simply put, even if it's much harder to crack one of these tiles than any asphalt road, that doesn't necessarily mean better if the few times that the tiles do break, they're leaving jagged protrusions up capable of tearing tires.

I only watched about 10 minutes & while the supporters aren't exactly selling me, the detractor in the vid made even less sense.

Seems like everything has to be 100% this or that for people.

I only watched about 10 minutes & while the supporters aren't exactly selling me, the detractor in the vid made even less sense.

Seems like everything has to be 100% this or that for people.

 

Exactly!  He kept shouting $20 trillion, like we'd be spending that much or nothing on this product. I also got a kick out of him finding that number by Googling the commercial cost of plate glass from Home Depot and multiplying that cost by the number of highway miles. Haha...that's rich.  I guess I keep wondering the amount of money we've spent on building our current road system since we decided to start paving them a century ago. I'm quite certain we've spent more than $20 trillion.

 

His point about tiles wobbling under repeated high speeds is definitely valid, which is why we're not trying to pave some interstate in these things right off the bat. The goal is to get some rural or small town stretch of road paved in the tiles to really test them out.

 

Regarding snow, we will definitely still need plows on highways, but the idea of heated surfaces to reduce the need to shovel to a minimum in winter is nothing new. Holland, MI has had heated sidewalks for 30 years now. It works great.

 

Lastly, if he'd bothered to watch any of the other videos, he'd know that the glass they're scooped is fill for the lower body of the tile. They're not melting it down at molten temps to create clear glass.

Without any real research, I would venture to say that the square footage of rooftops on publicly held buildings is significantly less than the square footage of public roadways.  Plus, all those roadways are already connected, unlike the rooftops.  I agree with ProkNo5, getting a small corporate business or town center as a test will give this technology a more rigorous trial.  Look how long it took other technologies to become ubiquitous.

 

To be completely honest, I think this has great potential in parking lots, or possibly very slow residential streets. But doing this on highways or busy streets with a lot of truck traffic seems difficult at best. I also think people are overselling the idea of seeing wildlife crossing the street ahead of them. I think technology can catch up and provide that information on the individual car level pretty easily. Some cars can even detect a car braking in front of you and hit the brakes for you if you aren't already.

 

And with all of the tall buildings downtown and tree cover in older suburbs, they wouldn't have a very big impact on a lot of streets.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/solar-roadways-dont-believe-the-hype-on-this-boondoggle-of-a-project#ixzz33VZB3EJI

 

• The panels would cost too much both as a solar panel and as a road surface.

• They won’t produce enough energy relative to conventional solar panels.

• There is no shortage of space to mount solar panels, so no need to embed them in the road.

• They are a maintenance nightmare compared to conventional road surfaces.

 

 

http://www.rinkworks.com/said/predictions.shtml

 

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."  Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943

 

Need I say more...

It's not that there is no market, it is the incredible expense, maintenance and really the ridiculousness of making roads out of a fragile material. 

 

It makes tons more sense and economic sense to put solar panels on roofs.  Duhhh.  The stupidity of putting this delicate and extremely expensive infrastructure on our most demanding and constantly damaged surface boggles the mind.

It's not that there is no market, it is the incredible expense, maintenance and really the ridiculousness of making roads out of a fragile material. 

 

It makes tons more sense and economic sense to put solar panels on roofs.  Duhhh.  The stupidity of putting this delicate and extremely expensive infrastructure on our most demanding and constantly damaged surface boggles the mind.

Did you even watch the original video on this enterprise?  It seems to me that they have put a lot of thought and testing into each aspect of the roadway.  It also is apparent that they will be continuing to test and improve upon the design.  By the time this goes on a well-traveled road, I'm sure it will be just as durable as asphalt or concrete.

 

If it made "tons" more sense to put solar panels on roofs, then why isn't it happening right now?  Why not use durable surfaces that are already connected with no extraneous maintenance challenges (height to access)?  Using roofs where there is no consistency to shape and structural capability, not to mention the potential for architectural blunders, does not make sense to me.  Roadways, sidewalks and parking lots are all pretty standard and when you can create standardization, you can drive down costs both in production and maintenance.

The first thing I thought of when viewing this topic was utilities. Streets are not just for moving people and vehicles; they are also corridors for all kinds of utilities, which need access and maintenance. What happens when the water company needs to replace a water main under one of these solar surfaces? Do they need to rebuild the whole street? How about placement of manholes, water valves, an so on? Can these solar streets be designed in complicated shapes for drainage? Street design is anything but simple, and solar pavements introduce a new level of complexity. There are good reasons why asphalt pavement is so popular.

^It was my understanding you just pick the panels up like bricks when you want to get underneath.

I would think these panels would be more wind resistant than the current panels set on rooftops.

solar roadways would go great with the flying cars from back to the future

That's just the thing - with flying cars & personal jet packs just around the corner, all these investments in roads & bridges makes very little sense.

Using these panels for rooftop landing pads might make sense.

It's always about money......Great ideas, and  things that make sense, never seem to get implemented because of money.

 

It's always about money......Great ideas, and  things that make sense, never seem to get implemented because of money.

 

 

Well, sure I agree. But I'll add that it's "money" and not always "cost" that's the key. Too many instances where we hold onto outdated and inefficient methods in the name of job preservation.

 

The current funding on Indiegogo is $2,012,402. Double their goal!

The company just put out a response to some of the critics in the video linked above, and other detractors on the Internet (because let's face it, the primary purpose of the Internet is a platform for detractors of all things susceptible to detraction):

 

http://www.solarroadways.com/clearingthefreakinair.shtml

for all the verbiage, there's not much there

The #NYC that Never was: a Robert Moses plan to build a highway through SoHo & Little Italy http://t.co/EYizwbXUbG http://t.co/kwmldBUctE

Here's another one for you - the Brooklyn-Battery Bridge: http://www.nypap.org/content/brooklyn-battery-bridge

 

It would have completely destroyed Battery Park.

 

The people against the bridge reached out to Eleanor Roosevelt, and FDR (who hated Moses) had somebody in the War Department make up a story about how the bridge was a threat to national security. That's the only reason it wasn't built. It was the first time some of Moses' former crowd came out against him, and the first major battle he lost.

 

Though I hate that it would have ruined Battery Park, I have a thing for double suspension bridges with a gigantic anchor in the middle. It would have been a beautiful structure had it been built.

Sounds like what people around here say about Albert Porter.  I suspect every older city has one.

There was definitely one of these types of heavy-handed, top-down style leaders who wanted sweeping changes in every city around this time. Moses gets the most recognition due to the scale and absurdity of some of his proposals. Some are actually quite interesting and I would have loved to have seen built in an undeveloped area of the country, not ripping through in tact historic neighborhoods.

I would recommend reading "The Power Broker" to every UrbanOhioer. I see somebody also mentioned it upthread. It's by far the longest book I've ever read, and I basically had to devote all my free time to it for two months, but it was worth it. Anyone interested in cities, transportation, history, New York, politics, or corruption would enjoy it. Although it's about New York, you can easily translate what happened there to any other city and understanding how American cities got to be the way they are today.

 

Moses figured out how to control the money through public authorities, getting in tight with unions, construction companies, politicians, and bond issuers. Once he had all those entities hooked, he could do whatever he wanted. I'm sure Albert S. Porter was cut from the same cloth.

 

He was a genius, grew up an idealist but turned into a jerk later on. He did a lot of good with parks, his roads and bridges are a little more debatable.

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Power-Broker-Robert-Moses/dp/0394720245

ASCE Headquarters ‏@ASCETweets  1h1 hour ago

What do you think of the idea? MT @FastCoDesign: These barriers quiet traffic & generate power http://f-st.co/55a5OkJ 

How Chinese superstition about the number 4 makes Beijing traffic worse http://t.co/AEVSTiytqw http://t.co/OCCFBPcqsr