3 ms·

The car company likely won’t have this as an official add on because of the obvious safety issues. Even in its folded up state, this presents a significant risk

• gpm 3y ago
  I would never expect a car company to sell a solution that looks like this, but integrated into the vehicles body you can remove all the drawbacks but weight (and optimize weight a lot more than the DIY solution can). See what Aptera is doing...
  • Ekaros 3y ago
    I think this picture makes it pretty clear why integrating solar panels in cars don't make too much sense. If this installation is 4kW and you compare the surface area to one available on the body of the car it comes clear that cost or implementation likely won't recoup investment. Both monetarily and in resource input.
    • gpm 3y ago
      In terms of dollars you should obviously expect more return by putting the same solar panels on a roof instead of a car - they generate the same energy and you aren't adding mass to an object you repeatedly accelerate. But then you have to charge your car. The win here is convenience. If you average more charge per day than you average driving (and you have a large enough battery to load balance) you practically never have to charge (ignoring outliers like long road trips).
    • masklinn 3y ago
      > If this installation is 4kW It's 2kW.
  • Throw84949 3y ago
    Net effect is negative even without weight! Tesla are 2 tons monsters that charge at 100 000 Watts. 100 Watts produced by integrated panels like this, are most likely not even enough to power up battery controller! If you charge Tesla from normal house plug in cold, 2KW are not enough to heat up battery pack. So car has to use energy from batteries for heating! So "charging" will actually reduce energy! Small solar panels are great for fixing parasitic battery drain on vehicles though!
    • gpm 3y ago
      If your argument is "the article is just flat out lying" I don't think we have a set of shared beliefs by which we can have an interesting conversation.
      • Throw84949 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • gpm 3y ago
          Yes you quoted numbers. You quoted numbers that are hard to screw up and directly contradicted by the article (as to the watts per solar panel). A new throwaway account coming to the comments and claiming the article is making up easily verifiable information isn't worth anything - especially when they appear to be pulling numbers from nowhere. Doubly especially when I'm pretty sure solar panels of that size are in fact more than 100W.
          • Throw84949 3y ago
            Your post was about solar panels INTEGRATED into cars roof. 100W is about what you can reliably pull from non-angled panel of that size on camper van. Sometimes it is more, usually far less. There is no way it can give 600 Watts to even START charging! Article is irrelevant here (different panels). Also it is a total garbage, and a good way to kill someone. Tesla S roof is certified for 165 pounds load, so it won't be even covered by insurance! As for throwaway account, I am tired of death threats!
• amluto 3y ago
  Not to mention drag and lift. This thing is very likely a net loss of efficiency while driving, even in full noon sun on a cold day, possibly a very large loss of efficiency.
  • thsksbd 3y ago
    I hadn't even considered lift. This got out a massive wrong in his roof and has lost most of his traction. Lucky for him he also installed a massive aerodynamic brake
    • Jtsummers 3y ago
      The vehicle is not driven while it's unfolded. Folded up, it looks to be a bit worse than a typical rooftop cargo carrier. It would not be a "wing".
  • gpm 3y ago
    You don't have to be more efficient while driving if the energy is "free" from while not driving, you just have to generate enough energy over the day to make up for (and then some) the efficiency losses. At "20-70 miles per day" of charge from the solar panels that is happening with any kind of normal driving habits.
    • Rygian 3y ago
      Putting solar panels to that use is preventing those same panels to be used any other more energy-efficient arrangement (e.g. a car roof). So it's a net loss.
      • Retric 3y ago
        Solar panel production is limited by demand not a lack of raw materials or something. You don’t need to worry that installing solar in less than ideal conditions will prevent highly efficient grid scale installations.
    • masklinn 3y ago
• kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
  The objective would be to do something like the solar roof on the Fisker Ocean. It's funny that Tesla was once invested in solar panel production but now it's a liability that diverts revenue from superchargers.