14 ms·
France to pave 1,000km of road with solar panels
- brianbreslin 11y agoA few things to point out: 1. putting solar on the ground means that it is less efficient (cars blocking rays) than raising it above the roadway and providing shade to the roadway. 2. Dirt on the panels makes them less efficient, roads are dirty 3. Expensive to fix. It is cheaper to fix asphalt than photovoltaic.
- Shivetya 11y agoIt is beyond stupid on so many levels only a politician could love it. The sad part is how much money politicians can waste without oversight, especially on dubious expenditures. They would get so much more bang for their buck putting up a solar array along the highway. However this really sounds as if the politicians bought a bill of goods and simply could not comprehend they don't understand the issues. As in, they are the smartest people they know so they are incapable of being sold a bill of goods that are bogus.
- coderdude 11y agoPoliticians generally aren't the bumbling idiots us computer enthusiasts would like to imagine they are.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoI prefer to look at it this way: effectiveness of their ideas is one of the least important things they optimize for. They're driven by constraints that have little to do with actual value to society.
- Piskvorrr 11y agoIn other words, if it does appear idiotic for all the technical reasons, it would follow other reasons are at play. (Call me a cynic, but "pork-barrel" immediately comes to mind.)
- tremon 11y agoPerhaps not, but it's also quite rare for a minister to be a domain expert in his portfolio.
- Retric 11y agoThat's a poor comparison, it's not about efficency at any one stage, it's a question of total cost vs total gain. If the cost of this road surface over it's lifetime is less than traditional road surface plus the equivelent solar cells over there lifetime then it's a good idea.
- cyphar 11y agoIt won't be. Tarmac is an incredibly well-designed material to use for roads. Glass + silicon is not (to put it mildly). Not to mention that the sheer cost of solar panels makes this a ludicrously expensive project (why didn't they just make a solar farm instead and save some of the money to pay for tarmac -- it's a much better way to spend your money).
- amelius 11y agoIt is a pity they will probably find out after 1,000 km, and not after, say, 1 km.
- Retric 11y agoTarmac is cheap and easy to apply, other than that it's a poor road surface. In heavy use coupled with poor conditions Tarmac can need resurfacing in as little as 5 years (10-20 is more common). Worse, it can significantly increase fuel consumption for heavy vesicles as the road surface deforms. Concrete is better for fuel consumption and can last 2-4 times as long, but needs regular gaps for heat expansion which can cause noise issues and poor ware patterns. It's also far more expensive and end of life roads often spend long periods in poor repair. Glass is actually a fairly competitive surface. Though, to expensive for most uses, people have used to for see though driveways etc.
- cyphar 11y ago> Tarmac is cheap and easy to apply, other than that it's a poor road surface. In heavy use coupled with poor conditions Tarmac can need resurfacing in as little as 5 years (10-20 is more common). Worse, it can significantly increase fuel consumption for heavy vesicles as the road surface deforms. Yes, but because it's cheap this isn't a big problem. Not to mention that glass will not last 5-20 years on a highway. It is much softer than the stones and other crap which will be scraped against it with car tyres. It will start to crack when it's hot. It will lose any grip very quickly (thus making it a public safety hazard) and won't function as a useful solar panel much faster than it will stop working. A driveway and a highway are very different problems to solve. > Concrete is better for fuel consumption and can last 2-4 times as long, but needs regular gaps for heat expansion which can cause noise issues and poor ware patterns. It's also far more expensive and end of life roads often spend long periods in poor repair. Yeah, concrete is good as well. I forgot to mention it. > Glass is actually a fairly competitive surface. Though, to expensive for most uses, people have used to for see though driveways etc. See above. I don't agree. And I don't see why people are trying to convince themselves that it isn't a stupid idea.
- Udik 11y agoAgreed, it seems that the economics simply don't add up. The article is also particularly deceptive, as it claims that 4 metres are enough to power one household, and 1km to "light a settlement of 5000 people". However, that means just powering the streetlights of a settlement of 5000, as 1000/4 = 250 only. It's interesting at least as an example of environmental action purely driven by an attempt to get cheap political support (pun intended). I wonder if such an experiment could at least drive further research and innovation.
- cyphar 11y agoI doubt that 4 meters of solar roadway would be able to power a household after 6 months of normal use (not to mention that the placement of solar panels on the road is such a stupid idea that it beggars belief).
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoThat's just the start. How about, the worst possible case for transmitting power to where its needed - a huge line. A real solar plant can be put where demand is. Also, the angle of the cells is necessarily straight up. Works on the equator, sucks every other place on the planet. And so on. This is an example of stupid thinking - "Roads are flat; solar cells are flat; lets combine them!" It ignores all the other requirements for a good (efficient, positive return) solar installation.
- bendykstra 11y agoI think you can ignore the effect of shadows from cars. If you look at satellite images of highways, the percentage of the road covered by cars is actually quite small (<5%, by length, I would estimate.) The reduced efficiency due to not orienting the panels at the optimum angle will be much greater. https://www.civicsolar.com/resource/effect-array-tilt-angle-energy-output https://www.civicsolar.com/resource/effect-array-tilt-angle-...
- vilda 11y agoSolar panels are connected in series to improve efficiency and reduce costs of inverters. Single panel under shadow degrades the whole set. It behaves as a resistance.
- bdamm 11y agoBut it's still only 5% resistant to the 95% providing electro motive force.
- snovv_crash 11y agoWhich is why you add bypass diodes. If you don't have bypass diodes, and have enough other cells in series, you can actually burn out a section of panel by casting a shadow on it.
- samuel1604 11y agomarketing gimmick me think, there was a bunch of discussion about it in france and nobody knows if it's very worthwhile
- deelowe 11y agoPlenty of people know. The public just prefers to accuse them of being heretics and corporate shills.
- inflagranti 11y agoAnyone who thinks this through a bit must realize that roads are one of the least optimal places to put solar panels. Solar panels are still not very cheap so putting them where they are not efficient tips the scale further against Solar energy. France on the other hand is one of the main producers of cheap atomic energy. Given all that I cannot see how this can be any more than a publicity stunt.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- StapleHorse 11y agoWhy would you complicate something so "easy" like putting solar panels on the side of the roadway? It's going to be so much less efficient for so many reasons ( orientation, dirt, cars shade, scratches) and maybe dangerous for the cars.
- funkyy 11y agoMy best bet would be because EU will pay for whole thing. They will be able to probably get money for roads + for environmental friendly project.
- thecopy 11y agoBecause this is not a rational market decision, this is politics.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ekianjo 11y agoBecause there's always a risk folks would steal the Solar Panels (not unheard of in France). If it's below the road, maybe it makes it a little bit harder and more dangerous.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoAnything between the solar cell and sunlight torpedoes efficiency. So never mind stealing them; they're useless under some layer of plastic or whatever. This whole project is pointless.
- prodmerc 11y agoYeah, this would be a pretty idiotic project. Might as well use that money to install panels for free for every house that wants them...
- petra 11y ago>> something so "easy" like putting solar panels on the side of the roadway? I'm not even sure that's the correct goal.In the end Global warming , is , well, Global. So they key to solving it is making clean energy the default choice for the china, india, etc. Is buying more solar panels helpful - sure it does help reduce the costs of solar panel manufacturing/installation. But is it one of the best places to invest, if the EU/france want to help ? i'm not sure - because there may be over investment in that area - since it's already economically viable on a large scale. I wonder though, maybe there are areas of under investment with lots of potential ?
- brudgers 11y agoRecent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779
- maxerickson 11y agoMore comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779 I guess they won't really be any different for this article
- downtide 11y agoI always think replacing traditional roofing materials with something that generates solar energy and keeps the rain off, makes for a good idea. You can get solar tiles, but I have never seen them in the UK. I have seen houses with panels on top of existing slates/tiles.
- downtide 11y agoAnother excellent idea I read about was storing solar heat in massive batteries underground. The battery being made of brick or stone, or earth. You catch heat in the summer and pipe it below ground, and warm up this underground store/battery (away from the water table). Because earth is also a good insulator the heat is localised. And in winter you reverse the process, drawing out the stored heat. Roads get very hot in the summer (in some places), and if you could store that heat for residential units in the winter that may be better than turning into electrical energy.
- imtringued 11y agoYeah it probably makes more sense to just use this kind of setup [1] except you ditch the mirrors and just embed the pipes directly into the road vs putting solar panels on the road. [1] http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/images/4-1-1solar_thermal.gif http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/images/4-1-1solar_the...
- egeekuk 11y agoThey are in the UK, certainly here in Northern Ireland at least. On the way out of Enniskillen there's an estate with them on it, but you can clearly see the difference between the non-solar and solar tiles in the roof. Here's a couple of products [0] and [1] (I'm not affiliated or connected in any way, just been looking into this while planning my own house). There's also this stuff [2] but I've never actually seen it installed anywhere yet. It takes a completely different approach and is more like a metal roof than slates. [0] http://www.solarcentury.com/uk/c21e-tiles-and-slates/ http://www.solarcentury.com/uk/c21e-tiles-and-slates/ [1] http://www.solexenergy.co.uk/ http://www.solexenergy.co.uk/ [2] http://www.viking-house.co.uk/tri-solar-roof.html http://www.viking-house.co.uk/tri-solar-roof.html (edited for formatting of the references)
- barney54 11y agoHere's the HN discussion of this same topic from a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11001779
- EGreg 11y agoIt reminds me heavily of this: http://youtu.be/qlTA3rnpgzU http://youtu.be/qlTA3rnpgzU
- scotty79 11y agoSome people on youtube did a bit math and simple home experiments on the economy of paving roadways with solar panels. https://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t/search?query=solar https://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t/search?query=solar https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog/search?query=solar+roadways https://www.youtube.com/user/EEVblog/search?query=solar+road...
- thearn4 11y agoIt looks interesting, but I really don't like watching videos for technical information. Do you know if they have a writeup on this anywhere?
- scotty79 11y agotl;dw Horizontal placement, dust, scratches vs brittleness, mechanics of moving load bearing by tiling vs continuous surface, cost of PV turn it into a joke. We'd be better off putting them above the roads than on the roads.
- kayfox 11y agoYou should watch some of Dave's (EEVBlog) videos, he's hilarious.
- thomasjames 11y agoI'm really looking forward to hearing just how loudly Dave facepalms in light of this development coming out of France.
- scotty79 11y agoHaven't watched it yet but there's double facepack 5 secs into the movie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjbKYNcmFUw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjbKYNcmFUw
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoDoes it rain in France? That looks pretty slippery. > Wattway cells collect solar energy using a thin film of polycrystalline silicon, but are resistant to the passage of heavy goods vehicles and offer sufficient traction to prevent skids. Ah. It is "sufficient". Okey Dokey. Edit: Oh, and never let science get in the way of politics!
- draven 11y ago> Does it rain in France? It depends where exactly in France. As pointed out by other posters it's not the most efficient way of getting power for various reasons, so this must be mostly motivated by political reasons. I really hope it's not slippery at all, I ride my motorbike all the time and a small skid has more consequences than with a car.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- CyberDildonics 11y agoPaving roads with solar panels is a classic example of a 'simple, easy, wrong' solution. It seems that some people have gross misconceptions about the barrier to solar panels. People living in crowded cities think there is some sort of shortage of space. In a broad sense this is of course very far from the truth. The barrier to solar is cost per kw/hr. As that goes down, solar installations go up.
- chillingeffect 11y ago> People living in crowded cities think there is some sort of shortage of space. Too true. When I spent some time in an urban technology research lab, the researchers and students gravitated strongly toward projects described as "a little tiny $X that you can carry with you." Their focuses narrowed from stage performances to screen-based art. In the Indra's web of city life, the wide, open space of rural areas was not only forgotten, but incomprehensible and unavailable as a resource for deployment.
- paulddraper 11y agoFirst thought: "You can carry any X dollars around, the form of a credit card." Second thought: "Oh, the $ is a indicator of some kind." Third thought: https://xkcd.com/1306/ https://xkcd.com/1306/
- stickfigure 11y agoPlus, the first light rain will turn this into a shiny death trap for motorcycles.
- donquichotte 11y ago"cost per kw/hr" kWh is a unit of energy, kW/h rarely makes sense (mostly if you're interested in dPower/dt)
- imaginenore 11y agoIt's actually kW*hr, not kW/h
- uremog 11y agoa.k.a, one megameter, or mm, no wait... that's already... uh....
- TJSomething 11y agoYes, megameter, or Mm, as opposed to millimeter, mm.
- rconti 11y agoWas on a long motorcycle trip with a few friends. We had left our home in the US and were traversing Canada which, of course, uses the metric system, unlike the US. As we passed one sign, it said something to effect of "Dawson City 1500km", which I remarked on over the radio as it was a nice round number (and, of course, quite some distance, and a large number you're unlikely to see on a road sign in the US due in part to the greater length of the mile). My buddy chimed in "ONE POINT FIVE MEGAMETERS" We laugh about it to this day.
- tdaltonc 11y agoMaybe start with 1km and see how that goes first.
- awqrre 11y agoThey didn't do any tests first?
- jlebrech 11y agoIt's the perfect solution for the uneducated to repeat the "fact" that solar isn't a viable solution, when the implementation is wrong. on the other hand solar bike paths have has success, but a cyclist is let likely to break glass than a car.
- alex_doom 11y agoGlass bike path when it rain sounds like a death trap
- darcyparker 11y agoIn addition to the efficiency concerns, France should be thinking about the conflict minerals that are likely in these solar panels. I am supportive of efforts to reduce energy consumption and alternative more environmentally friendly energy sources. And it's exciting to hear about new solutions for energy that appear affordable. But I am hesitant to use technologies that use conflict minerals. Before we make decisions about buying innovative products like solar cells, we need greater awareness about the materials they use and where they are coming from.
- hendler 11y agoA lot of threads point to the dangers and inefficiencies, as well as political motivations. Does anyone know the economics of paving roads with cement or tar per m^2? The labor and material cost would be transferred and somewhat offset installing solar elsewhere. I can not speak to the claims of safety, but I would imagine the decision is rational enough not to be endangering lives.
- stingraycharles 11y agoI would be interested to hear this argument out. This was the first thing that came to my mind: are there any savings in the costs of the actual road? If you take those savings into account, what does the net cost / kwh look like?
- ukandy 11y agoYou still need to build a normal road under the solar panels. They aren't going to be laying solar panels on dirt.
- ukandy 11y agoWouldn't it be simpler to dictate that if you own a commercial warehouse over xxxx sqm you must install solar panels, or allow them to be installed. Give large incentives, better rates, it's not like the nuclear industry don't get a helping hand.
- pi-err 11y agoThe "1000 km" title is misleading. The tiles will be mostly installed on parking space near commercial centers and on a few low-speed connecting roads. I find it actually a great idea, especially with more electrical cars looking for plugs at those locations. Some details and a video on https://www.aruco.com/2016/01/1000km-routes-solaires-france/ https://www.aruco.com/2016/01/1000km-routes-solaires-france/ . The video does show how they think of it for side roads (and don't say it because PR). edit: also part of the breakthrough here is that the upper layer is made of recycled glass and resin and is not slippery. Bit surprised by the negativity around this on HN.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ukandy 11y ago> The tiles will be mostly installed on parking space near commercial centers.. What would possible block the sun from reaching these solar cells... > I find it actually a great idea, especially with more electrical cars looking for plugs at those locations. Oh yeah.
- pi-err 11y agoTheir PR is unfortunately low quality and low on facts, though critical thinking would also try to look at the "why". The futur or "solar roads" is clearly not highways and express lanes. It's slow speed, commercial areas - as badly presented by Colas. For the context, land use in Europe is so different than in the US. Suburbs don't crawl as much and space is more of a premium. Thinking at a really local level, for a new retail space like this: https://goo.gl/maps/BRkQ5qNyaQU2 https://goo.gl/maps/BRkQ5qNyaQU2 - the fields around the center are either here to stay or would be built on. About 80% of this commercial space is parking lots. It's wasted space. Why not use it to produce power? Why use additional fertile or constructible terrain to add solar tiles? Since 2015, businesses in France also have to build either gardens or solar panels on their rooftops (new constructions and redevelopments). So that's turning 90% of space used into something productive or "user-friendly". Again why not do it? The pricing of those solar tiles is interesting: 6 euros per max watt produced on location. Cheap enough - and you get free power for parking users. It's also great PR for solar to get inserted in people's lives at such locations.
- beat 11y agoGah, what a terrible idea. Making a durable, safe road surface that's also useful as a solar source? Why not just put a solar roof on the entire road instead? It'd probably be cheaper, and almost certainly safer and more efficient. If we wanted to generate electric power off of road surfaces, why not embed piezoelectric or some other compression-to-energy mechanism instead? Cars rolling over the road apply a tremendous amount of physical energy to the surface. Capture that energy. It's probably more than you'd get from solar.
- mangeletti 11y ago> Cars rolling over the road apply a tremendous amount of physical energy to the surface. Capture that energy. This is a misunderstanding of thermodynamics. There is no energy to be captured without adding friction to the existing situation. Even capturing the vibration would tax the vehicles traveling over the road. This is similar to the old "smart steps" concept[1], which takes extra energy (beyond the energy already required to take a step) from the person walking on it. 1. http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/13/tech/innovation/pavegen-kinetic-pavements/ http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/13/tech/innovation/pavegen-kineti...
- smileysteve 11y ago> There is no energy to be captured without adding friction to the existing situation. The point is that there is already added friction (we want cars to grip roads and feet to have cushioned impact) and wear (asphalt is a liquid). Cars already compress roadways, brake on them, etc. To the other extent, a flexible base could reduce some of the wear by adding flexibility. For "Smart Steps" yes, they consumer energy from the walker, but the walker also has less impact on joints. Running tracks prefer absorbing surfaces (rubber) for the increased friction vs concrete - not absorbing energy.
- mangeletti 11y agoYour point is true, if we were to replace all the asphalt roads with a new form of road. I suspect the energy and material requirements for making an energy-capturing dampening system that feels similar to asphalt to the vehicles overhead would far outweigh the benefits (I'm picturing some sort of electrolyte putty with thousands of wire leads every meter, funneling microamps of energy into a the heavier wire in a conduit underneath).
- ajnin 11y agoNot mentioned is the total cost of the project, estimated at around 2.7 billion Euro for 10-15 years of life expectancy according to the industrial manufacturer (Colas). There is a very long way, in France, between political declarations of intention and actions, so I'm betting this will never be done. Which would probably be for the best, a predictable failure such as this project would slow down development of renewables in France even more.
- kumarski 11y agoDid Indiegogo pay for this site?
- whiw 11y agoThis will be a maintenance nightmare. The software concepts of Separation Of Concerns and Object Single Responsibility might be usefully applied to this domain.
- whiw 11y agoThis will be a maintenance nightmare. The software concepts of Separation Of Concerns and Object Single Responsibility might be usefully applied to this domain.
- Nano2rad 11y agoPutting solar panels above the road is better. It will also keep road cool.
- nvader 11y agoMaybe as engineers we are tempted to misunderstand the motivation for building this. As other commenters have pointed out, the main reason for this is political. Perhaps the secondary reason is not so much the actual utility of the solar roadway but the visual impact and the meaning that it represents. I mean, one of the biggest cities on Earth has giant woman made of copper placed on an island just outside it.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoSee this topic (solar roads) is the Perpetual Motion machine of renewable energy. Folks flock to the idea regardless of the implausibility, regardless of the massive evidence that is nonsense. And trying to argue is like trying to argue with a pig; you just get muddy, and after a while you notice the pig likes it.
- mapt 11y agoSo let's take the conservative end of this - 1,000 lane-kilometers. Assume a lane is about 4 meters. Thus we have 4 square kilometers as a target, if we assume a square meter of road is exactly as good as a square meter of dirt. http://www.france-agri-invest.com/property_for_sale/91.html http://www.france-agri-invest.com/property_for_sale/91.html A Stunning Estate of 404 hectares near Toulouse Price: € 4,130,000 € including all fees About 1€ per square meter. For farmland on the expensive, 'stunning' end of the spectrum. Put it there. Whole program. Forget about the roads. Now you don't have to shut down FOUR THOUSAND KILOMETERS of active traffic-bearing road, or employ an army of thousands of installers, or repeatedly install it because it "lasts up to ten years". You don't have to deal with an extra layer of glass-polymer tile on top, you don't have to run all of the wiring in the least efficient and least maintainable manner possible, you don't have to do a bunch of things that become necessary if you stick it in the road. 1m^2 of solar panel at 20% efficiency achieves about 200 watts at theoretical best insolation. Solar panels are presently priced around 0.25€ per watt, so we arrive at a cost of around 50€ per square meter panel, or 50x as much as the land to place the panels on. 4 million Euros wouldn't be more than a tiny fraction of a program like this. Using the roads has the potential to increase costs by a factor 10x-1000x over using simple panels.