Solar Freakin' Roadways

narf;n3543500 said:
I didn't specify angle or elevation, just "on the ground" as opposed to "on top of a tunnel/roof over the interstate".

You specifically said “on the ground” that implies laying flat, if you didn’t say on the ground you’d have some wiggle room.
 
mpicco;n3543509 said:
Laying them flat as opposed to having them on sun tracking mounts greatly reduces their efficiency too, so, nobody sane would put them flat on the ground.

Heliostats make things much more complicated and expensive though, whether that's worth it compared to equator-facing at the correct fixed angle for the latitude or at a two switchable angles for summer and winter depends on things... but yeah, flat is not a thing far from the equator.
 
narf;n3543518 said:

None of these panels are on the ground, they are mounted on a structure that rises out of the ground.

EDIT:

Oh wait, after looking through a few of those pictures I found one of panels ON the ground:
GroundSolar_900x600.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think he meant mounted on the ground, as opposed to mounting them on something's roof, or on top of car parks, or buildings, etc.
 
mpicco;n3543524 said:
I think he meant mounted on the ground, as opposed to mounting them on something's roof, or on top of car parks, or buildings, etc.

Such is his claim, however it is not what he said.
 
Sure...but its also not not what he said. Perhaps I'm more imaginative and less literal, but I figured he meant setup in a more efficient and suitable way adjacent to the road and not literally flat on the ground. Its not the internet if you aren't quibbling over what your semantic interpretation of what someone else's writing means though... so please continue.
 
prizrak;n3543522 said:
None of these panels are on the ground, they are mounted on a structure that rises out of the ground.

EDIT:

Oh wait, after looking through a few of those pictures I found one of panels ON the ground:
GroundSolar_900x600.jpg

It's even in the friggin' image, 2nd hit:

12.2015_ground-mount.png
 
narf;n3543532 said:
It's even in the friggin' image, 2nd hit:

[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/news.energysage.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/12.2015_ground-mount.png"}[/IMG2]

They are mounted on a frame that is on the ground sure, but the panels aren’t on the ground.

narf;n3543454 said:
you might as well put the solar panels on the ground next to the interstate
 
Last edited:
Prizark, you do a terrible Narf imitation.
 
And oh look, Solar Roadways may just now have committed fraud. On their own camera.
 
I seem to remember Germany (southern portion) has solar panels next to their highways.
 
93Flareside;n3544157 said:
I seem to remember Germany (southern portion) has solar panels next to their highways.

I've seen that in Switzerland, mounted on/near noise barriers.
 

And now SR is calling people who demonstrate the failure of their visibility/anti-glare claims with photos or video liars.
 
Welp, the first field tests of the concept are in. Not looking very good for any solar roadway idea....


 
Looks like Ze Churmann take on Solar Freaky Roadwaiz not only didn't work put apparently went on fire all by itself.

 
Like a bad horror movie villain, SFR just won't go away despite how bad an idea it is.

 
Top