*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3094
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #40 on: May 24, 2014, 06:50:25 PM »
It seems like you didn't watch the video either. If all cement and asphalt are replaced by solar panels then you don't even have to worry about the busy roads since there is more than enough sidewalks, driveways, and parking lots that are not being covered by cars to make up for the busy ones. And it's not just about the energy. There are benefits to these solar panels being placed specifically underneath cars.

If a panel gets damaged it is easily and quickly replaced. I'm sure you know what happens when a road gets damaged. Construction crews have to come out and clog up traffic for extended periods of time just to strip and repave the road.

And it's not a scam, "Solar Roadways has received two phases of funding from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration for research and development of a paving system that will pay for itself over its lifespan." This pipe dream is just to get the first prototype parking lot which they inevitably will get.

Why would thy not just put these on people's roofs?  Then, they would not have to worry about dirty cars driving over them.  In fact, they have actually done this already.  It is not cost efficient to this on roofs, yet somehow, it is cost efficient to put them on roads? 

Also, replacing the panels was not a point.  Yes, panels can be replaced.  The question is, how much energy goes into each panel compared to the amount of energy taken from each panel.  So far, we have yet to get a net gain in mass.  Putting the panels under cars would not incease the efficiency.

And finally, it can not be proved to not be a scam just because the Federal Highway Administration has given money to research the idea.  Somebody has already made a lot of money and no conclusive results have been achieved yet.  Is this not the definition of a scam? 

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3138
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #41 on: May 24, 2014, 07:14:54 PM »
Why would thy not just put these on people's roofs?  Then, they would not have to worry about dirty cars driving over them.  In fact, they have actually done this already.  It is not cost efficient to this on roofs, yet somehow, it is cost efficient to put them on roads? 

Yes, because you didn't watch the video you don't see the many benefits that come with it outside of solar energy. Warning signs to prevent accidents, heated roads which would keep businesses and schools open during the winter, better water drainage, wires would be running in a corridor underground rather than above ground power lines, quick construction, using recycled materials for manufacturing, etc.

Quote
And finally, it can not be proved to not be a scam just because the Federal Highway Administration has given money to research the idea.  Somebody has already made a lot of money and no conclusive results have been achieved yet.  Is this not the definition of a scam? 

lol, wut? Don't you need to have prototypes on the road for it to have conclusive results? You can't have a conclusive results without going through the whole scientific method first. So far, their claims seem solid and substantiated.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #42 on: May 24, 2014, 07:46:47 PM »
As for the rubber and oil, how often do cars leave rubber trails?  And how often do they leak oil?
Add to that glass which isn't as permiable as asphalt and normal rain may take care of the problem.  But that's something the prototype will help answer.

Car tires constantly shed rubber.  It's what happends when a thing like friction occurs.  That is why tires wear out.  Or did you think that tires wear due to evaporation? 
I am fully aware that tires eventually wear out due to friction.  What they don't usually do, however, is leave large deposits of rubber on the road.  The normal wear on a tire grinds the rubber into fine particles which ends up being nothing more than dust.  Dust which is quite nicely washed away with the rain.


Quote
Also, no matter how well engineered a car is, it will inevitably have a little less oil when you take it to have the oil changed than it did when the oil was topped off last time.  Where do you think this oil went?
Oil burns up and becomes carbon deposits in the engine itself.  Yes gaskets do eventually leak but on a brand new car the oil will not leak out in any location.  On older cars, oil will begin to leak from gaskets.  Most notably the engine block gasket and the cylinder gaskets.  But the oil leak is very slow and won't have any noticeable impact on the road.  Especially in locations where rain exists.

Quote
I have not even mentioned soot from the exhaust pipe. 
You mean the soot that is fine dust particles that often times are blown into the air by moving vehicles?  Yes, I can see how that's a problem...

Quote
In addition, you have natural dirt, such as mud and dust.  How long do you think that the road will stay clean?
Until the next time it rains. 

Seriously, if these issues were actually a problem, why are painted lines still vislble?  Surely they'd have been covered by dust, dirt, mud, soot, rubber, and oil by now.


Do you even understand what efficiency is?  You are basically saying that an engine that is 90% efficient is equally efficient as 9 engines that are 10% efficient.  Have you ever had a math or science class that discussed the meaning of efficiency?  Serious question here. 
No.  I'm saying that a mass produced set of 10 panels, operating at 1/10 the potential (if no cars were on them) would produce as much as 1 panel operating at full potential (no cars).


It seems like you didn't watch the video either. If all cement and asphalt are replaced by solar panels then you don't even have to worry about the busy roads since there is more than enough sidewalks, driveways, and parking lots that are not being covered by cars to make up for the busy ones. And it's not just about the energy. There are benefits to these solar panels being placed specifically underneath cars.

If a panel gets damaged it is easily and quickly replaced. I'm sure you know what happens when a road gets damaged. Construction crews have to come out and clog up traffic for extended periods of time just to strip and repave the road.

And it's not a scam, "Solar Roadways has received two phases of funding from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration for research and development of a paving system that will pay for itself over its lifespan." This pipe dream is just to get the first prototype parking lot which they inevitably will get.

Why would thy not just put these on people's roofs?  Then, they would not have to worry about dirty cars driving over them.  In fact, they have actually done this already.  It is not cost efficient to this on roofs, yet somehow, it is cost efficient to put them on roads? 

Also, replacing the panels was not a point.  Yes, panels can be replaced.  The question is, how much energy goes into each panel compared to the amount of energy taken from each panel.  So far, we have yet to get a net gain in mass.  Putting the panels under cars would not increase the efficiency.

And finally, it can not be proved to not be a scam just because the Federal Highway Administration has given money to research the idea.  Somebody has already made a lot of money and no conclusive results have been achieved yet.  Is this not the definition of a scam? 
No conclusive results?
Are you suggesting that a parking lot prototype isn't conclusive results?
Currently their prototype parking lot is producing more energy than their shop requires.


If it really was a scam, making a working prototype would seem to be a very expensive way to conduct said scam.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #43 on: May 24, 2014, 08:08:49 PM »
Quote
Did you even read that little bout she had? All she did was show the opposite to be true, that every country on the planet has a lot of free space.



Yellow land is land currently being used by humans. Much of the green land that is left is preserved. Please explain how this is "a lot of free space". Most other first world countries (such as south korea and japan) have the same issues.

Quote
Sorry, I thought we were talking about winds high enough to tear off solar panels. Those are only present in hurricanes.

See: Severe Weather
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_weather
Quote
And you actually called me the naive one. Wow.

See Privately Owned and Decentralized Septic Tanks vs. Centralized, Government Water Treatment Plants

Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_blackout_of_2003

Thank you for providing a single example. For more on Decentralization vs. Centralization, see:

Global Warming
Ozone Depletion
Oil Spills
Gay Marriage in America
Slavery in America
Civil Rights in America
Feudalism

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #44 on: May 24, 2014, 08:29:17 PM »
Yellow land is land currently being used by humans. Much of the green land that is left is preserved. Please explain how this is "a lot of free space". Most other first world countries (such as south korea and japan) have the same issues.

Okay, so let me get this straight, your argument is that there is literally no space at all left for anything in Europe? If the German government wants to build a new, well, anything, they fling their arms into the air and say "we don't have any room for anything!"

...Really?

See: Severe Weather
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_weather

No winds outside of a tornado or hurricane is going to damage a solar panel. You're just spouting nonsense at this point.

Edit: Uh oh, looks like I was wrong. Better mark hurricanes off the list:

http://1bog.org/yes-solar-panels-can-survive-a-hurricane/

See Privately Owned and Decentralized Septic Tanks vs. Centralized, Government Water Treatment Plants

Yes, septic tanks are much better.

Thank you for providing a single example. For more on Decentralization vs. Centralization, see:

Global Warming
Ozone Depletion
Oil Spills
Gay Marriage in America
Slavery in America
Civil Rights in America
Feudalism

What exactly is your point? Have you given up? Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 08:33:59 PM by Irushwithscvs »

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #45 on: May 24, 2014, 10:50:01 PM »
The rubber deposits and damage to the panels seem to be the biggest problem to me.  If you have driven on a highway, you have undoubtedly seen tire marks from where someone had to break hard, I see countless spots on my fifty mile commute to and from work.  In fact, new marks are appearing every couple of days.  Though this problem might be solved with periodic street cleaning.  In my mind it seems like it would be pretty easy to damage the panels, causing them to need to be replaced pretty frequently.  A fairly serious crash would likely cause damage to quite a few panels (depending on speed and size of vehicle).  I also see quite a few gouges in the road during my commute, which on an asphalt road is not a problem but a solar panel road would at least cause the panel to be defective but could lead to loose glass in a worst case scenario.  Just this past week we had a tractor trailer tip over and leak gas onto the road in my direction, there was a section of about 20-50 feet of roadway with tread marks and gouges in the road, along with severely marked up portions on the shoulder.  Which also makes me curious about vehicle fires and their effect on the panels.

All of this is said without me having watched the video yet, so if they did address my concerns sufficiently in them I apologize.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3138
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #46 on: May 24, 2014, 11:04:20 PM »
The rubber deposits and damage to the panels seem to be the biggest problem to me.  If you have driven on a highway, you have undoubtedly seen tire marks from where someone had to break hard, I see countless spots on my fifty mile commute to and from work.  In fact, new marks are appearing every couple of days.  Though this problem might be solved with periodic street cleaning.  In my mind it seems like it would be pretty easy to damage the panels, causing them to need to be replaced pretty frequently.  A fairly serious crash would likely cause damage to quite a few panels (depending on speed and size of vehicle).  I also see quite a few gouges in the road during my commute, which on an asphalt road is not a problem but a solar panel road would at least cause the panel to be defective but could lead to loose glass in a worst case scenario.  Just this past week we had a tractor trailer tip over and leak gas onto the road in my direction, there was a section of about 20-50 feet of roadway with tread marks and gouges in the road, along with severely marked up portions on the shoulder.  Which also makes me curious about vehicle fires and their effect on the panels.

All of this is said without me having watched the video yet, so if they did address my concerns sufficiently in them I apologize.
They did not address it in the video.

It seems like the obvious concern so I'm sure it's not as likely as we think it is. The panels exceeded testing requirements which is a good sign right there.

And then there is this nice FAQ link which I just found. http://www.solarroadways.com/faq.shtml

EDIT: They have an answer for every question and concern that's been raised in this thread so naysayers should read it.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 11:08:28 PM by rooster »

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #47 on: May 24, 2014, 11:29:19 PM »
They plan to use textured glass as a means to enable friction, which is additionally an awful idea compounded with my other points. Throughout the FAQ they seem to vastly underestimate the amount of wear and tear a road has to handle. I would be very interested in knowing the coefficient of friction on them and how well they withstand such friction applied nonstop.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 11:30:57 PM by Irushwithscvs »

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #48 on: May 25, 2014, 12:26:18 AM »
Quote
Okay, so let me get this straight, your argument is that there is literally no space at all left for anything in Europe? If the German government wants to build a new, well, anything, they fling their arms into the air and say "we don't have any room for anything!"

...Really?

Thanks for the straw man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man . How ironic.

Quote
No winds outside of a tornado or hurricane is going to damage a solar panel. You're just spouting nonsense at this point.

Edit: Uh oh, looks like I was wrong. Better mark hurricanes off the list:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2012/1119/Are-renewables-stormproof-Hurricane-Sandy-tests-solar-wind.
Damage on solar panels by a weak hurricane. Easily debunked.

Severe storms can have wind speeds not related to tornadoes above 150 miles per hour. As shown by Hurricane Sandy, sustained tropical storm-force winds are enough to damage solar panels.

Quote
Yes, septic tanks are much better.

No, septic tanks are well known suffer from inadequate maintenance and upkeep from their owners. Often septic tanks will be found polluting the local water supplies with nitrogen and other detrimental substances.

Quote
What exactly is your point? Have you given up? Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
You gave an example against my point. I gate multiple examples supporting my point. Do you not understand what a straw man is?

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #49 on: May 25, 2014, 12:40:58 AM »
The rubber deposits and damage to the panels seem to be the biggest problem to me.  If you have driven on a highway, you have undoubtedly seen tire marks from where someone had to break hard, I see countless spots on my fifty mile commute to and from work.  In fact, new marks are appearing every couple of days.  Though this problem might be solved with periodic street cleaning.  In my mind it seems like it would be pretty easy to damage the panels, causing them to need to be replaced pretty frequently.  A fairly serious crash would likely cause damage to quite a few panels (depending on speed and size of vehicle).  I also see quite a few gouges in the road during my commute, which on an asphalt road is not a problem but a solar panel road would at least cause the panel to be defective but could lead to loose glass in a worst case scenario.  Just this past week we had a tractor trailer tip over and leak gas onto the road in my direction, there was a section of about 20-50 feet of roadway with tread marks and gouges in the road, along with severely marked up portions on the shoulder.  Which also makes me curious about vehicle fires and their effect on the panels.

All of this is said without me having watched the video yet, so if they did address my concerns sufficiently in them I apologize.
They did not address it in the video.

It seems like the obvious concern so I'm sure it's not as likely as we think it is. The panels exceeded testing requirements which is a good sign right there.

And then there is this nice FAQ link which I just found. http://www.solarroadways.com/faq.shtml

EDIT: They have an answer for every question and concern that's been raised in this thread so naysayers should read it.
Thanks for that link, it was pretty informative.  I'm still a bit apprehensive about car tire tread marks though.  They mentioned about bicycle tire marks coming off using their finger and speculated that the next vehicle tire would remove or loosen the material, until they test this I'll remain a bit apprehensive about it.  I'm also wondering how bad sinkhole country will be for this.  Currently they can just slap on a metal slab over the hole until they can take care of it, you can't exactly secure a metal slab to glass panels easily.

It'll definitely be interesting to see the before and after of a test town, cost of making a new asphalt road vs. solar road, cost of maintenance, road closer statistics, etc.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #50 on: May 25, 2014, 12:50:56 AM »
They plan to use textured glass as a means to enable friction, which is additionally an awful idea compounded with my other points. Throughout the FAQ they seem to vastly underestimate the amount of wear and tear a road has to handle. I would be very interested in knowing the coefficient of friction on them and how well they withstand such friction applied nonstop.
Plan?
Err... have.
They have used textured glass.  On their parking lot.

Do people not see the pictures?!

http://www.solarroadways.com/hirespics.html

The frictional coefficient is at least as high as asphalt.

And what do you think glass is, some horribly fragile material?  Haven't you ever heard of bullet-proof glass?

As for load:
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/solar-road/

250,000 pounds.
Not f*cking bad for glass!

And really, what kind of damage is a road going to have?  Car crashes usually end with a car hitting an object at high speeds, not the road.  In roll over cases, the force of the impact is going to be minor.  The only time you'd have something heavy hit the road with enough momentum to do serious damage is a trailer carrying very heavy objects (steel beam or what not) that crashes down and skids.  Or even just a tractor trailer that rolls over with a full load.

Your standard sedan?  Not so much.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3138
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #51 on: May 25, 2014, 12:58:34 AM »
Yeah, I think there's this assumption of the glass being really fragile. But think about it, they wouldn't seriously consider this as an option if the glass were not able to withstand the obvious traction/impact concerns.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #52 on: May 25, 2014, 01:04:28 AM »
Yeah, I think there's this assumption of the glass being really fragile. But think about it, they wouldn't seriously consider this as an option if the glass were not able to withstand the obvious traction/impact concerns.

It's passed all civil engineering tests required of any road material.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3138
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #53 on: May 25, 2014, 01:07:36 AM »
Yeah, I think there's this assumption of the glass being really fragile. But think about it, they wouldn't seriously consider this as an option if the glass were not able to withstand the obvious traction/impact concerns.

It's passed all civil engineering tests required of any road material.
Yes, I know. I've already stated that before. But people hear "glass" and they think of shattering, fragile glass.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #54 on: May 25, 2014, 02:03:09 AM »
Plan?
Err... have.
They have used textured glass.  On their parking lot.

Do people not see the pictures?!

http://www.solarroadways.com/hirespics.html

The frictional coefficient is at least as high as asphalt.

And what do you think glass is, some horribly fragile material?  Haven't you ever heard of bullet-proof glass?

As for load:
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/solar-road/

250,000 pounds.
Not f*cking bad for glass!

And really, what kind of damage is a road going to have?  Car crashes usually end with a car hitting an object at high speeds, not the road.  In roll over cases, the force of the impact is going to be minor.  The only time you'd have something heavy hit the road with enough momentum to do serious damage is a trailer carrying very heavy objects (steel beam or what not) that crashes down and skids.  Or even just a tractor trailer that rolls over with a full load.

Your standard sedan?  Not so much.

I'm not worried about the glass working for a parking lot where cars don't move quickly and frictional energy is low. I do know, however, is that cars have a lot of forward force, meaning a lot of energy transferred via friction. This is how pot holes come about, because sections of asphalt get worn by the sheer force of car tires all day. I question how much force this glass can handle day after day without becoming worn. Cars are essentially big sand paper grinders on asphalt. I don't know if you've taken sand paper to glass recently, but it doesn't take much friction to sheer particles off.

While this glass is probably tougher, I very much question how much frictional force it can take before becoming smooth. The fact that they need to texture the glass at all should be a red flag for safety.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #55 on: May 25, 2014, 02:19:11 AM »
Plan?
Err... have.
They have used textured glass.  On their parking lot.

Do people not see the pictures?!

http://www.solarroadways.com/hirespics.html

The frictional coefficient is at least as high as asphalt.

And what do you think glass is, some horribly fragile material?  Haven't you ever heard of bullet-proof glass?

As for load:
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/solar-road/

250,000 pounds.
Not f*cking bad for glass!

And really, what kind of damage is a road going to have?  Car crashes usually end with a car hitting an object at high speeds, not the road.  In roll over cases, the force of the impact is going to be minor.  The only time you'd have something heavy hit the road with enough momentum to do serious damage is a trailer carrying very heavy objects (steel beam or what not) that crashes down and skids.  Or even just a tractor trailer that rolls over with a full load.

Your standard sedan?  Not so much.

I'm not worried about the glass working for a parking lot where cars don't move quickly and frictional energy is low. I do know, however, is that cars have a lot of forward force, meaning a lot of energy transferred via friction. This is how pot holes come about, because sections of asphalt get worn by the sheer force of car tires all day. I question how much force this glass can handle day after day without becoming worn. Cars are essentially big sand paper grinders on asphalt. I don't know if you've taken sand paper to glass recently, but it doesn't take much friction to sheer particles off.

While this glass is probably tougher, I very much question how much frictional force it can take before becoming smooth. The fact that they need to texture the glass at all should be a red flag for safety.
Are you really using the argument of "it'll wear out"?

Quote
I do know, however, is that cars have a lot of forward force, meaning a lot of energy transferred via friction. This is how pot holes come about, because sections of asphalt get worn by the sheer force of car tires all day.
This is false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pothole


You do know that your entire argument is based on the idea that asphalt is somehow stronger than glass.  It's actually very weak by comparison.  Glass is a solid while asphalt is a loose collection of material (usually gravel) bound together by a liquid.

That's like saying solid pine is weaker than particle board.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #56 on: May 25, 2014, 02:35:55 AM »
Are you really using the argument of "it'll wear out"?

Well, yeah, if you want to put it that way.

This is false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pothole
"Traffic then fatigues and breaks the poorly supported asphalt surface"

Regardless of how asphalt is supported it is still almost solid rock held together with tar. If that can break apart from sheer frictional force, I don't think any form of textured glass will last very long.


You do know that your entire argument is based on the idea that asphalt is somehow stronger than glass.  It's actually very weak by comparison.  Glass is a solid while asphalt is a loose collection of material (usually gravel) bound together by a liquid.

Glass is a amorphous solid (it does not hold shape for extended periods of time) and can not withstand much frictional force. Take sand paper to glass and then take it to asphalt. You'll notice a big difference.

That's like saying solid pine is weaker than particle board.

Since you got your facts mixed up this analogy looks even worse.

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #57 on: May 25, 2014, 05:08:07 AM »
This is false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pothole
"Traffic then fatigues and breaks the poorly supported asphalt surface"

Regardless of how asphalt is supported it is still almost solid rock held together with tar. If that can break apart from sheer frictional force, I don't think any form of textured glass will last very long.
Ummm... no.  The "frictional force" is the tar being ripped apart(slowly).  The pot holes are when the weight of a vehicle is pressed down on it.  Yes, rock is harder than glass.  Well, some glass anyway.  But then, the rocks aren't the road now are they?

Quote
You do know that your entire argument is based on the idea that asphalt is somehow stronger than glass.  It's actually very weak by comparison.  Glass is a solid while asphalt is a loose collection of material (usually gravel) bound together by a liquid.

Glass is a amorphous solid (it does not hold shape for extended periods of time) and can not withstand much frictional force. Take sand paper to glass and then take it to asphalt. You'll notice a big difference.
1. amorphous solids are not defined by that characteristic nor is it an explicit characteristic of amorphous solids.  They simply lack a crystaline structure.  Nothing more.
2. Rubber is not sand paper.  Sand paper on tires will destroy the tires.  Therefore, sand paper is actually rougher than rubber. (and it'll destroy asphalt faster fyi)
Also, the Moh's scale lists gorilla glass at about a 9.  Normal glass, a 7.
Rubber is lower on the Moh's scale of hardness than glass.  What does that mean?  It means rubber CAN NOT DAMAGE GLASS BY FRICTION! (see your windshield wipers for proof)

In fact, the textured glass will do more damage to the tires than the tires could possibly do to the glass.
The glass used was tested on a British Pendulum Testing apparatus at at one point, damaged it due to the high friction.

Finally:
http://www.tedpella.com/company_html/hardness.htm
Look at asphalt.  1-2.  1-2!
Damn near anything will scratch that.  Even GLASS will scratch asphalt!
So stop this poor argument about glass wearing down.  Even normal glass (hardness of 7) is harder than asphalt.  If anything, tires will wear down faster on a glass surface compared to an asphalt surface.


Quote
That's like saying solid pine is weaker than particle board.

Since you got your facts mixed up this analogy looks even worse.
Since you don't know anything about hardness, your comment looks even worse.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
    • View Profile
Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #58 on: May 25, 2014, 06:20:19 AM »
1. amorphous solids are not defined by that characteristic nor is it an explicit characteristic of amorphous solids.  They simply lack a crystaline structure.  Nothing more.

It also means they are less stable in their current shape.

2. Rubber is not sand paper.  Sand paper on tires will destroy the tires.  Therefore, sand paper is actually rougher than rubber. (and it'll destroy asphalt faster fyi)
Also, the Moh's scale lists gorilla glass at about a 9.  Normal glass, a 7.

Uhh, what? You might want to read this over again and check your logic.

Rubber is lower on the Moh's scale of hardness than glass.  What does that mean?  It means rubber CAN NOT DAMAGE GLASS BY FRICTION! (see your windshield wipers for proof)

Last time I checked my windshield isn't textured. Dave, if rubber slid so easily on the glass, then the tires wouldn't have any grip on it. Come on, did you not see that leap while you were writing this garbage?

In fact, the textured glass will do more damage to the tires than the tires could possibly do to the glass.

This is additionally awful and if true is yet another reason these roadways shouldn't be used.

The glass used was tested on a British Pendulum Testing apparatus at at one point, damaged it due to the high friction.

How is that good?

Damn near anything will scratch that.  Even GLASS will scratch asphalt!
So stop this poor argument about glass wearing down.  Even normal glass (hardness of 7) is harder than asphalt.  If anything, tires will wear down faster on a glass surface compared to an asphalt surface.

I'm not talking about the glass wearing off, I'm talking about the texture wearing off and causing the glass to become smooth.

Since you don't know anything about hardness, your comment looks even worse.

Check yo self before you wreck yo self

Re: Solar Roadways
« Reply #59 on: May 25, 2014, 02:33:18 PM »
I'm not talking about the glass wearing off, I'm talking about the texture wearing off and causing the glass to become smooth.

Since the entire argument basically boils down to this line, I figure I'd just quote that and get rid of the exceedingly long quotes.


Glass isn't a fluid.  Nor does it exhibit plasticity at temperatures seen on the road.  If tire friction created such temperatures, said tire would melt long before the glass became soft enough to be smoothed.