6 ms·

On their Twitter there’s video showing it getting 100W in full sunlight. That’s the equivalent to 0.5m^2 of rooftop solar. It’s just not worth the effort of put

On their Twitter there’s video showing it getting 100W in full sunlight. That’s the equivalent to 0.5m^2 of rooftop solar. It’s just not worth the effort of putting the cells on the car.

onethought 6y ago
So a car park of them would generate many kWs. Why isn’t it “worth” it... turning car parks into solar farms sounds pretty cool to me.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  Because they'd barely charge themselves, let alone feed anything back into the grid?
  - onethought 6y ago
    True. Much better to just not generate any power so that they don’t charge themselves at all and don’t feed anything to the grid.
    - GauntletWizard 6y ago
      Much more effective than putting solar panels into the roofs of cars would be putting those same solar panels into solar roofs above parking lots. Much lower installation and maintenance costs.
      - thombat 6y ago
        And now the parking lot has a roof, giving a nicer environment for the drivers and cars.
    - onion2k 6y ago
      It'd be a more efficient use of money and resources to put the solar panels on a roof to generate more electricity than they'd generate on a car, and make a car with a bigger battery rather than solar panels. So yes, your sarcastic remark is actually 100% correct.
      - labcomputer 6y ago
        > It'd be a more efficient use of money and resources to put the solar panels on a roof to generate more electricity than they'd generate on a car This is an under-appreciated point by the solar car advocates. In order to get anywhere close to a practical self-charging car, you have to put panels on an area equivalent to covering the entire surface of the car (including the windows!). For a conventionally-shaped car, approximately 1/3rd to 2/3rds of those panels (depending on the orientation of the car w.r.t. the sun) are producing essentially zero electricity. Either because they are actually facing away from the sun, or just at such an extreme angle to the sun. In other words, you get between 50% to 200% more power by taking those panels off the car and slapping them on a roof. The difference in practice will be much greater in urban environments because buildings tend to shade the street (where cars park).
        onethought 6y ago
        But doing it is what drives innovation... Battery tech is improving at crazy pace because everyone is using batteries for everything now. You don't think the same would happen if wide spread adoption of solar started happening? Arguing: "Technology isn't good enough yet, so we shouldn't try"... how do you expect to make it good enough?
      - onethought 6y ago
        Right because we don’t have enough panels for cars and roofs, and must choose one.
        bobthepanda 6y ago
        Presumably the car's solar panels are not getting any sun under a roof. A car having anything remotely close to useful solar charging requires so many goldilocks conditions to be just right that it's not worth the complexity, and it's better to invest equivalent resources into more practical solutions.
        onethought 6y ago
- mike_d 6y ago
  Around here many parking lots have covered roofs made of solar panels and electric charging stations. Much more efficient than trying to put panels at sub-optimal angles all over a car.
- Robotbeat 6y ago
  Because bidirectional car chargers cost thousands more than regular L2 chargers.
  - onethought 6y ago
    I'm confused by this... they are built into the car already. You just plug one car into another the cost of the charger is already realised.
- unionpivo 6y ago
  because neither solar panels, cables or charging network (to connect the cars) is free (money and emissions).
  - onethought 6y ago
    But the alternative (a normal EV) still requires all the same cables and charging network. Or the other alternative, the shipping of petroleum on huge trucks to millions of locations. But yeah, I'd draw the line at solar panels on car roof tops too... the excess is too much.
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  Naïvely, "more panels == more electricity". But since we haven't run out of efficient places to put panels, that means any put in ridiculous places (on top of cars; under sidewalks etc) are not a good use of panels. Panels must be positioned to face the sun, must be unobscured, must be in daylight during prime hours to make it worthwhile. Car roofs are often none of those things. You want car parks turned into solar stations? Then mount them in the car park over the cars, angled at the sun permanently. Its a simple change, cheaper, and works many many times better. And gets crap off your car making it lighter and reducing drag.

On their Twitter there’s video showing it getting 100W in full sunlight. That’s the equivalent to 0.5m^2 of rooftop solar. It’s just not worth the effort of putting the cells on the car.

onethought 6y ago

So a car park of them would generate many kWs. Why isn’t it “worth” it... turning car parks into solar farms sounds pretty cool to me.

bobthepanda 6y ago
Because they'd barely charge themselves, let alone feed anything back into the grid?
- onethought 6y ago
  True. Much better to just not generate any power so that they don’t charge themselves at all and don’t feed anything to the grid.
  - GauntletWizard 6y ago
    Much more effective than putting solar panels into the roofs of cars would be putting those same solar panels into solar roofs above parking lots. Much lower installation and maintenance costs.
    - thombat 6y ago
      And now the parking lot has a roof, giving a nicer environment for the drivers and cars.
  - onion2k 6y ago
    It'd be a more efficient use of money and resources to put the solar panels on a roof to generate more electricity than they'd generate on a car, and make a car with a bigger battery rather than solar panels. So yes, your sarcastic remark is actually 100% correct.
    - labcomputer 6y ago
      > It'd be a more efficient use of money and resources to put the solar panels on a roof to generate more electricity than they'd generate on a car This is an under-appreciated point by the solar car advocates. In order to get anywhere close to a practical self-charging car, you have to put panels on an area equivalent to covering the entire surface of the car (including the windows!). For a conventionally-shaped car, approximately 1/3rd to 2/3rds of those panels (depending on the orientation of the car w.r.t. the sun) are producing essentially zero electricity. Either because they are actually facing away from the sun, or just at such an extreme angle to the sun. In other words, you get between 50% to 200% more power by taking those panels off the car and slapping them on a roof. The difference in practice will be much greater in urban environments because buildings tend to shade the street (where cars park).
      - onethought 6y ago
        But doing it is what drives innovation... Battery tech is improving at crazy pace because everyone is using batteries for everything now. You don't think the same would happen if wide spread adoption of solar started happening? Arguing: "Technology isn't good enough yet, so we shouldn't try"... how do you expect to make it good enough?
    - onethought 6y ago
      Right because we don’t have enough panels for cars and roofs, and must choose one.
      - bobthepanda 6y ago
        Presumably the car's solar panels are not getting any sun under a roof. A car having anything remotely close to useful solar charging requires so many goldilocks conditions to be just right that it's not worth the complexity, and it's better to invest equivalent resources into more practical solutions.
        onethought 6y ago
mike_d 6y ago
Around here many parking lots have covered roofs made of solar panels and electric charging stations. Much more efficient than trying to put panels at sub-optimal angles all over a car.
Robotbeat 6y ago
Because bidirectional car chargers cost thousands more than regular L2 chargers.
- onethought 6y ago
  I'm confused by this... they are built into the car already. You just plug one car into another the cost of the charger is already realised.
unionpivo 6y ago
because neither solar panels, cables or charging network (to connect the cars) is free (money and emissions).
- onethought 6y ago
  But the alternative (a normal EV) still requires all the same cables and charging network. Or the other alternative, the shipping of petroleum on huge trucks to millions of locations. But yeah, I'd draw the line at solar panels on car roof tops too... the excess is too much.
JoeAltmaier 6y ago
Naïvely, "more panels == more electricity". But since we haven't run out of efficient places to put panels, that means any put in ridiculous places (on top of cars; under sidewalks etc) are not a good use of panels. Panels must be positioned to face the sun, must be unobscured, must be in daylight during prime hours to make it worthwhile. Car roofs are often none of those things. You want car parks turned into solar stations? Then mount them in the car park over the cars, angled at the sun permanently. Its a simple change, cheaper, and works many many times better. And gets crap off your car making it lighter and reducing drag.