cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
on 28 Nov 08:38
nextcollapse
When are they going to learn that solar roads are never going to be practical?
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
on 28 Nov 10:24
collapse
PV Magazine is more or less an outlet for press releases by companies trying to innovate (often in air quotes) with photovoltaics. I’m honestly not even sure why it’s allowed here; it’s completely uncritical. May as well cite a press release on the manufacturer’s website at that point instead of laundering it through a magazine.
Peer@discuss.tchncs.de
on 28 Nov 08:41
nextcollapse
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 29 Nov 21:08
collapse
In fairness, road traffic is orders of magnitude more destructive than foot traffic.
Traister101@lemmy.today
on 29 Nov 22:39
nextcollapse
Right, but the last attempt was falling apart within months of instillation with very light foot tragic and weather so…
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 30 Nov 04:14
collapse
in fairness to being fair, there have been multiple attempts, and every single time the results are extremely clear. Building an elevated solar shade using solar panels to both generate power, and cool down the walking/biking path. Is both more effective, and more practical.
This depends on what you’re optimizing for. If you are optimizing for total energy captured per square metre, then you’re right about the benches.
But suppose you have a sufficient flux even with some areas being covered so you aren’t bothered by the shadows. Wouldn’t it be aesthetically superior to have uniform tile types? Or would you prefer they micromanage the tile placement such that the tiles below the bench shadows are different?
Anyway, I think it is a good idea. Better than the silly solar roadways crap.
If an area requires covering, it might as well produce some power. And cells on the ground aren’t as bad as they’re made out.
I have one laying flat in the yard powering a 12V water pump. Been there for 6-months, covered in pollen and dust, weeds growing over one side, grass cuttings on top, never cleaned, works fine. I have another on my shed roof at our camp. Same deal with the pollen and dust, works fine. But guess which one is easier to clean?
Cells don’t have to be pristine to produce power. And if you do want to clean them? The installation pictured looks easy to work with a garden hose and squeegee, couldn’t take 30 minutes. Use concrete instead? OK, now you have to power wash it. What a pain.
CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
on 28 Nov 23:18
collapse
The cells ability to produce power is directly related to how much light it gets. You’d be able to measure it. Take a reading as is. Then remove the weeds, take a reading. Then clean it, take a reading. Then point it at the sun so it’s as perpendicular as you can get it, take a reading. Each time you should see an increase in output.
Panels on the ground that people are going to walk in (or drive) are going to be prone to damage. I’m fact, they’ve already done ground solar panel installations and they’ve all failed as far as I know. When placed above, you don’t need to over engineer it to survive things. Concrete, can handle a lot more wear and tear, as well as being easy to repair and recycles really well.
Basically, there’s an objectively better way to use the panels.
Yeah but now you don’t have a terrace you have something that’s in permanent shade. Long story short: People still want to be able to see the sky. You can, in principle, plaster a whole city with solar pavers, you can’t cover it all in solar roofs.
Things like solar roadways don’t make sense because a) cars much less trucks are way more destructive and b) you don’t really need to see the sky when driving. But a terrace? If there’s any place for ground solar, then there. The question isn’t whether it’s a good solar installation, the question is whether it’s a good terrace paving and if the extra costs are made up for by electricity production then sure, why not.
bangupjobasusual@lemmy.world
on 29 Nov 15:48
nextcollapse
Is it… lifting them 8’ off the ground that makes it impossibly expensive? Or maybe… the people in that area do not like shade?
How complicated are the electronics to ensure that the voltage dip from one panel with a table sized shadow doesn’t drag down the whole array?
Cenzorrll@lemmy.world
on 29 Nov 17:03
nextcollapse
It’s not that bad. Part of the appeal is having a black glass panel patio. A 30 year payback is ok, if it bails you out of a few power outages. Ok, its solar for rich people, but its still some clean energy.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 30 Nov 04:13
collapse
oh good, yet another solar solution where you put solar panels underground, instead of like, building a pavilion and putting the solar panels on the top of it, where they would make more fucking power.
threaded - newest
When are they going to learn that solar roads are never going to be practical?
PV Magazine is more or less an outlet for press releases by companies trying to innovate (often in air quotes) with photovoltaics. I’m honestly not even sure why it’s allowed here; it’s completely uncritical. May as well cite a press release on the manufacturer’s website at that point instead of laundering it through a magazine.
Hope the predicted capability is realistic. As previously we’ve seen comparable projects be less so: dutchnews.nl/…/solar-bike-path-fails-to-meet-elec…
Can’t they just make it a roof?
Yeah feels already hot from just looking at it
And put some goddamn plants under it.
They are a roof tile company. This is just a thick anti slip glass layer on top of solar.
We need more trees and green areas in cities to shade and cool them down, not more heat soaking open areas that heat them up!
never use solar panels for side walks its a stupid idea. and there is a reason why solar panels are placed at angle and not flat on the ground.
For fuck sake!
Put solar on roofs, not where people walk/drive!
Can we please stop wasting resources on this shit?
Not if some tech-bro can convince some gullible coked-up VC.
Oohh, solar roadways, part 4621559
Trailer: they suck, don’t work, and are made by people who have no idea what the fuck they’re doing
Solar freakin roadways
Not freakin again.
In fairness, road traffic is orders of magnitude more destructive than foot traffic.
Right, but the last attempt was falling apart within months of instillation with very light foot tragic and weather so…
in fairness to being fair, there have been multiple attempts, and every single time the results are extremely clear. Building an elevated solar shade using solar panels to both generate power, and cool down the walking/biking path. Is both more effective, and more practical.
does anyone know where I can get strong opinions about solar rods?
The image of benches shading the panels really says all you need to know.
True, they should use benches like these for solar rays to pass through
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/b598b0b1-6c00-41a1-b618-fb722451fed4.jpeg">
No, I think solution is to install some SOLAR FREAKING BENCHES
Literally just put them 2 and a half meters higher so they provide shade for sitting on the bench instead of people shading the panels.
I think you may be on to something here…
This depends on what you’re optimizing for. If you are optimizing for total energy captured per square metre, then you’re right about the benches.
But suppose you have a sufficient flux even with some areas being covered so you aren’t bothered by the shadows. Wouldn’t it be aesthetically superior to have uniform tile types? Or would you prefer they micromanage the tile placement such that the tiles below the bench shadows are different?
Anyway, I think it is a good idea. Better than the silly solar roadways crap.
So you’re saying solar freakin benches is the answer???!!!‽
Solar Roadways 2.0?
Nope, still solar roadways 1.0 again, they just hope that everyone forgot how crappy they are
Y’all missing the whole point here.
If an area requires covering, it might as well produce some power. And cells on the ground aren’t as bad as they’re made out.
I have one laying flat in the yard powering a 12V water pump. Been there for 6-months, covered in pollen and dust, weeds growing over one side, grass cuttings on top, never cleaned, works fine. I have another on my shed roof at our camp. Same deal with the pollen and dust, works fine. But guess which one is easier to clean?
Cells don’t have to be pristine to produce power. And if you do want to clean them? The installation pictured looks easy to work with a garden hose and squeegee, couldn’t take 30 minutes. Use concrete instead? OK, now you have to power wash it. What a pain.
The cells ability to produce power is directly related to how much light it gets. You’d be able to measure it. Take a reading as is. Then remove the weeds, take a reading. Then clean it, take a reading. Then point it at the sun so it’s as perpendicular as you can get it, take a reading. Each time you should see an increase in output.
Panels on the ground that people are going to walk in (or drive) are going to be prone to damage. I’m fact, they’ve already done ground solar panel installations and they’ve all failed as far as I know. When placed above, you don’t need to over engineer it to survive things. Concrete, can handle a lot more wear and tear, as well as being easy to repair and recycles really well.
Basically, there’s an objectively better way to use the panels.
Yeah but now you don’t have a terrace you have something that’s in permanent shade. Long story short: People still want to be able to see the sky. You can, in principle, plaster a whole city with solar pavers, you can’t cover it all in solar roofs.
Things like solar roadways don’t make sense because a) cars much less trucks are way more destructive and b) you don’t really need to see the sky when driving. But a terrace? If there’s any place for ground solar, then there. The question isn’t whether it’s a good solar installation, the question is whether it’s a good terrace paving and if the extra costs are made up for by electricity production then sure, why not.
Is it… lifting them 8’ off the ground that makes it impossibly expensive? Or maybe… the people in that area do not like shade?
How complicated are the electronics to ensure that the voltage dip from one panel with a table sized shadow doesn’t drag down the whole array?
A diode would work
parallel connections allows for such independence. But it requires thicker/more wiring.
Independent micro inverters for each panel would be my guess.
i’d be more worried about heat, dispersing heat with literally zero airflow is going to be rough.
Why not both? Maybe also make the table and chairs out of solar panels!
Just make covered walk ways. It’s only going to get hotter anyway. Give pedestrians shade to walk under.
Why just use a field and use normal tested panels.
It’s not that bad. Part of the appeal is having a black glass panel patio. A 30 year payback is ok, if it bails you out of a few power outages. Ok, its solar for rich people, but its still some clean energy.
oh good, yet another solar solution where you put solar panels underground, instead of like, building a pavilion and putting the solar panels on the top of it, where they would make more fucking power.