*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #200 on: June 13, 2014, 01:24:05 AM »
Thunderf00t really hates solar freakin' roadways.



He does.
He also doesn't seem to understand that glass comes in a wide variety of makeup.

Maybe he also gets a broken iPhone and sees if the gorilla glass can wear away asphalt. Of course the tempered glass of a coffee pot should be just fine, seeing as part of the original video showed them shoveling recycled glass into a wheelbarrow presumably to make these roadway tiles.
Why would he rub asphalt against glass anyway?  To prove Asphalt is harder than glass?

*watches video again*

Is that.. .is that asphalt with aggregate in it?
And why did he only show us a few seconds of scratches?  I watched it a few times and I couldn't see much of the scratches.  He didn't even show us the results.  He just rubbed it once then cut the film.

Also:
Aggregate is what scratched it.  I'd like to see him try that shit with PURE asphalt.  Which, according to the table of hardness, is much softer than glass.  But let him ignore such scientific details. 
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #201 on: June 13, 2014, 02:49:21 AM »
Also:
Aggregate is what scratched it.  I'd like to see him try that shit with PURE asphalt.  Which, according to the table of hardness, is much softer than glass.  But let him ignore such scientific details.
I'm guessing that the pure asphalt would smear all over the glass and block quite a lot of the available sunlight.

Also, I think this video does a better job of showing the scratch tests:
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #202 on: June 13, 2014, 04:06:54 AM »
I got through about 3 minutes of that video and noticed he is once again using retail price as well as assuming 100% conversion right off the bat.  He also assumes every LED will be on 100% of the time for his energy use calculation, when you can probably figure roughly 50% of the LEDs on a panel may be turned on at the same time, and not every panel in America would be on all the time.  Plus his voice is annoying.

Offline Shmeggley

  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #203 on: June 13, 2014, 05:46:11 AM »
What would be the point of testing pure asphalt on glass anyway? The point is what happens when cars are driving over all the pebbles, dirt and sand that will inevitably get on the road.

I'm also curious to see how good the traction really is once the road gets all oily and wet?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #204 on: June 13, 2014, 09:00:28 AM »
Is that.. .is that asphalt with aggregate in it?
Yes, the kind that you make roads out of. Why would he be using anything else?

And why did he only show us a few seconds of scratches?  I watched it a few times
If you watched it a few times, then you must have heard him a few times when he said he's got more details in his other video (the one markjo linked), and this one is just for laughs.

Aggregate is what scratched it.  I'd like to see him try that shit with PURE asphalt.  Which, according to the table of hardness, is much softer than glass.  But let him ignore such scientific details.
Why? It would have absolutely nothing to do with actual roads. It'd be an exercise in futility.

I got through about 3 minutes of that video and noticed he is once again using retail price as well as assuming 100% conversion right off the bat.  He also assumes every LED will be on 100% of the time for his energy use calculation, when you can probably figure roughly 50% of the LEDs on a panel may be turned on at the same time, and not every panel in America would be on all the time.  Plus his voice is annoying.
He already assumed 50 LEDs per tile, so that's your main concern covered. But hey. Slash all of his numbers by a factor of 100. Guess what? Still doesn't help.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 09:06:12 AM by pizaaplanet »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #205 on: June 13, 2014, 12:26:04 PM »
I also like how he pointed out that LEDs are kinda hard to see in bright sun and solar panels that just lay flat on the ground don't get nearly as much sunlight as angled and steerable panels get.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #206 on: June 13, 2014, 02:22:15 PM »
I don't understand how assuming 50 LEDs per tile covers my main concern.  Under normal circumstances on a four lane highway you'll have 5 strips of light, assuming a 7 ft lane with a 2 ft shoulder on either side that's 32 ft. Take his 1.5 ft per tile measure and you have 12 tiles which is 600 lights. Figure each strip is two lights thick, 3 for the border strip, and 7 lights per length of tile since 7x7 is the closest even layout for 50 lights, and that is 49 lights for the lanes per 600 lights,  or 2% of the lights. Of course in cities it will be more, but a vast majority of US roads are not in the city.  Let's just assume 20% of lights need to be on, that's only 2.4 trillion of his 12 trillion figure.  Cut that in half to account for day and you get 1.2 trillion.  Cut that again to account for the empty nighttime roadways, we'll assume a very generous 40% usage and you get 480 billion which is a far cry from 12 trillion and also probably a significant overstatement.  This is also assuming the figures of 109% conversion.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #207 on: June 13, 2014, 03:24:55 PM »
But hey. Slash all of his numbers by a factor of 100. Guess what? Still doesn't help.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #208 on: June 13, 2014, 04:19:25 PM »
He isn't helping his case by using faulty numbers.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #209 on: June 13, 2014, 05:38:07 PM »
He isn't helping his case by using faulty numbers.
When the numbers are multiple orders of magnitude outside of anything realistic or practical, accuracy isn't all that necessary.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #210 on: June 13, 2014, 05:51:51 PM »
When the numbers are only a portion of your argument and you can't get them right, what other misinformation are you spreading?

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #211 on: June 13, 2014, 08:43:50 PM »
Why would he rub asphalt against glass anyway?  To prove Asphalt is harder than glass?

Yes.

I'd like to see him try that shit with PURE asphalt.

Are roads made from pure asphalt?

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #212 on: June 13, 2014, 09:19:01 PM »
I like his video, I didn't watch all of it though. I wonder if there's been a rebuttal from Solar Roadways answering these more specific arguments.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #213 on: June 13, 2014, 09:45:46 PM »
Well from their website:

http://www.solarroadways.com/clearingthefreakinair.shtml

They still have major issues, and some of the assumptions they make in their rebuttals are flawed. I still maintain that the best they can do is strip it back to its bare components (toughened solar panel) and install it in a car park somewhere. Then wait 10 years and see how it works out. Fuck the touch sensors and the heaters and the LEDs.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #214 on: June 13, 2014, 09:50:23 PM »
Yes, a proof of concept parking lot would go a long way to demonstrate how viable this system is. They should install these somewhere where there is ample sunlight year round, and where there is no need to run a snowplough over them. I don't see why they need millions of dollars to accomplish that.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #215 on: June 13, 2014, 10:10:49 PM »
Seems like a decent rebuttal to me. Nice bit on the recycled glass, the hardness of tempered glass, and outdoor LEDs.

Yes, a proof of concept parking lot would go a long way to demonstrate how viable this system is. They should install these somewhere where there is ample sunlight year round, and where there is no need to run a snowplough over them. I don't see why they need millions of dollars to accomplish that.
And that's what they've been doing with the prototype parking lot.

Quote
Thanks to our funding from Indiegogo, we are now going to hire a team of engineers this summer, who will help us make tweaks to the design, streamline production and get costs down.

They say the money is used to hire a team of engineers and those don't come cheap.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #216 on: June 13, 2014, 10:33:58 PM »
prototype parking lot.

It needs to be a parking lot that actually gets used. That someone paid for. With lots of parking bays. Not the promotional one they use in their pics. Its nice and everything, as a showcase of what it looks like, but its not a paying customer.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #217 on: June 13, 2014, 10:35:50 PM »
It needs to be a parking lot that actually gets used. That someone paid for. With lots of parking bays. Not the promotional one they use in their pics. Its nice and everything, as a showcase of what it looks like, but its not a paying customer.
Fair enough, seems like a logical next step.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #218 on: June 13, 2014, 10:48:47 PM »
So then why are they hiring engineers if it hasn't even been tested to see if it's a viable road surface? If part of those initial millions don't end up paving someone's lot for free, I don't think these guys are serious.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #219 on: June 14, 2014, 12:28:09 AM »
It has gone through testing to be proven as a feasible road surface. The engineers are to make it all work smoothly and safely , etc. I'm sure you can imagine that a lot of tests, prototypes, and R&D has to go into something like this.