EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
General => General Technical Chat => Topic started by: ECEdesign on February 12, 2016, 05:37:11 pm
-
Just saw this article from the IEEE :scared:
http://transmitter.ieee.org/solar-power-hits-the-road/ (http://transmitter.ieee.org/solar-power-hits-the-road/)
-
IEEE has bought into Solar Roadways...
Does that suddenly make the solar roadway a good idea or a bad idea? :)
This goes to show how important it is to be able to think critically. There is nothing in the world that is always good or always bad. Solar roadways may be a great idea for some applications and a terrible idea for others. What's important is to be able to analyze its pros and cons and come to a conclusion for yourself.
Just because someone said it is a good idea, or a bad idea for that matter, doesn't make it a good or bad idea.
-
This goes to show how important it is to be able to think critically. There is nothing in the world that is always good or always bad. Solar roadways may be a great idea for some applications and a terrible idea for others. What's important is to be able to analyze its pros and cons and come to a conclusion for yourself.
I agree, thats the whole point of going to college! I think Dave's evidence presented some pretty big obstacles for the solar roadway industry. I can't image snow plows going over solar roadways... our roads are coated in a salt concoction as well currently. Not to say innovation couldn't overcome but its got a looong way to go.
-
I don't know if I mentioned this before or not.
But governments have access to all the public roads and have budgets for them, they don't, however, have access to all the roofs since, for now, most of them are private.
Sides of the roads, only work on highways that are far from where the demand for power is at. Sides on city roads, is not practical either.
Although I wouldn't mind if a private company or government entity rented my roof as long as they maintained it so I would have two less things to worry about, power and roof repair costs.
-
IEEE has bought into Solar Roadways...
Does that suddenly make the solar roadway a good idea or a bad idea? :)
This goes to show how important it is to be able to think critically. There is nothing in the world that is always good or always bad. Solar roadways may be a great idea for some applications and a terrible idea for others. What's important is to be able to analyze its pros and cons and come to a conclusion for yourself.
Just because someone said it is a good idea, or a bad idea for that matter, doesn't make it a good or bad idea.
Putting PV panels underneath a road can never ever be a good idea. It's bollocks.
-
rented my roof
Not practical and likely not economical. Installation is expensive and maintenance more so. Comparatively speaking, solar farms are far more effective economically.
Our energy solution in the not-so-near future is likely concentrated nuclear power plants. Distributed power is just too costly and inefficient.
-
The stuff TerraPower is doing with nuclear reactors is pretty cool. Last time I heard they were working on using less highly enriched U so we could use what is now nuclear waste as new fuel. Much improved safety as well.
-
Putting PV panels underneath a road can never ever be a good idea. It's bollocks.
Exactly.
I work beside a guy who bills himself as an 'inventor'. He is funded by Dad's money and the guy is a terrible inventor. His inventions all pretty much consist of putting two existing things together and calling it a new thing. For example (and these aren't real things), a pen with a pencil on the other end. It's just two things that, when put together, have no reason to be together and perform worse than the individual things do themselves. Another example (this one real) a fishing rod with a beer holder on it. For what purpose? There is no reason to put those things together and, when paired, they both perform badly.
Solar Roadways is the same. Two things that, individually are fine, but have zero reason to be together and when forced together, perform badly.
There is nothing at all whatsoever about a road that makes it a complimentary technology to a solar panel... and there are many things about each thing that make them extremely uncomplimentary. Dave's covered most/all of those things... but it boggles the mind that people keep jumping on this bandwagon.
It speaks badly for the average intellectual maturity of the consumer.
-
...Solar roadways may be a great idea for some applications and a terrible idea for others. What's important is to be able to analyze its pros and cons and come to a conclusion for yourself...
Putting PV panels underneath a road can never ever be a good idea. It's bollocks.
Some make a fortune on this scam, sure for them it's a good idea.
-
Mother Nature just isn't cooperating!
The latest came from this LATimes article, "Thirsty continents are slowing down expected sea level rise, scientists say": http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html)
the models were first stumped by un-anticipated volatility in historical data (hockey sticks), then expanding polar ice cap, retarded temperature rises (unexpected again), then water vapors and clouds. And now a thirsty earth!
It must be really tough to be a climate scientist these days, :)
-
Mother Nature just isn't cooperating! [...]
Does a day go by where you don't try and drag a thread off into political hell with out-of-context bullshit?
-
Well, and if we read the article it is not endorsing solar roadways or anything, it's just reporting on the initiatives we have saw and discussed in other threads. And it's from Sept/2015 it looks like (date at the very bottom of the article).
But they do just repeat something I think in one of the threads was said to be not feasible:
Solar Roadways offer a solution to weather-related driving hazards, as they generate enough heat to melt ice and snow in colder climates, and could be used to collect and recycle runoff from the roads to ensure filtration.
-
I think in one of the threads was said to be not feasible:
Yes, by people who don't understand the different between latent heat and specific heat, :)
-
rented my roof
Not practical and likely not economical. Installation is expensive and maintenance more so. Comparatively speaking, solar farms are far more effective economically.
And yet that's exactly what's been going on here in the UK. Some company installs PV on your roof and you get free electricity out of it. They make enough to cover that, the build and maintenance costs, and additionally make serious profit. Good job they didn't consult you first! :-DD
-
Seems to me that the idea behind solar roadways won't be economical until you can spray or glue "solar" onto any surface, it includes storage, and is easily repairable and connectable... In other words, until it's basically solar nano-goo (and even then it wouldn't make much sense to use it on the roads).
-
If we all want to debunk this on a worldwide scale, let's start to document and write on it.
Having a quick look on Wikipedia, there is no controversy at all, not a single comment on the efficiency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_highway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_highway)
Who would be ready to create the controversy chapter, backed up with the official data Dave has put together? :) (themselves backed up with the official sources, of course)
Also getting some researchers/professors ready to talk about this, and generating some noise could be a good start?
The public opinion is not even aware that this may actually not be such a good idea (let's agree now, that it will never go further than that...).
PS: in the UK, googling for "solar road" gives www.solarroadways.com (http://www.solarroadways.com) as a first result. The third one being their own Wikipedia page. At least someone has done his job properly! ;D
-
I think the discussion is uninteresting from a couple totally unrelated perspectives.
1. Does solar roadway makes sense? I think it is very hard to make an argument for building solar panels into the roads, vs other alternatives, for example in open space, along the highway or on top of the highway. As a novelty item, it can be a niche product.
2. Can you envision a scenario where solar roadways make sense? Absolutely. Novelty roads, lighted roads in hospitals for example. And specifically, a road that's always snowfree can be a huge plus in some areas.
What this thread has demonstrated is some people's inability to listen / read. When they hear "solar roadways ***can*** make sense", they heard instead " solar roadways ***make*** sense", without realizing that those two statements are totally different.
-
Mother Nature just isn't cooperating!
The latest came from this LATimes article, "Thirsty continents are slowing down expected sea level rise, scientists say": http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-20160215-story.html)
the models were first stumped by un-anticipated volatility in historical data (hockey sticks), then expanding polar ice cap, retarded temperature rises (unexpected again), then water vapors and clouds. And now a thirsty earth!
It must be really tough to be a climate scientist these days, :)
Don't be a flipping idiot, you really believe the claim that the earth is heavier because water is now in the ground instead of the ocean. Just shut up or put up, or I'll put you up!
-
I think the discussion is uninteresting from a couple totally unrelated perspectives.
1. Does solar roadway makes sense? I think it is very hard to make an argument for building solar panels into the roads, vs other alternatives, for example in open space, along the highway or on top of the highway. As a novelty item, it can be a niche product.
2. Can you envision a scenario where solar roadways make sense? Absolutely. Novelty roads, lighted roads in hospitals for example. And specifically, a road that's always snowfree can be a huge plus in some areas.
What this thread has demonstrated is some people's inability to listen / read. When they hear "solar roadways ***can*** make sense", they heard instead " solar roadways ***make*** sense", without realizing that those two statements are totally different.
I think the OP just pointed put the article, YOU are the one that has turned it into a polarized row. One day I'll get tired of you!
-
I'm the one that mentioned that it could be feasible for some cases where there is no access to private roofs on post 3.
As for the earth heavier, that's not what the article says, it says that gravity will increase as the crust absorbs more water therefore increasing the crust density in "thirsty" coastal land masses and reducing the expected water level rise by 20% from prior models if memory serves me right for what the article said.
Granted, being a moderator you do as you want, but silencing a user because you don't like what his message brings is a bit too much in my opinion.
-
If we all want to debunk this on a worldwide scale
Why?
Seriously, why? We are not all doommongers (or are we) and I would have thought it sufficient for interested parties to discuss this between them. But actively going out there to diss it in the eyes of the world is... well, why? Other than for getting a buzz from showing that you wield far more power than you should be able to.
ISTM that Roadways is irrelevant to the man in the street. Anyone tempted to invest in this will be looking at losing a lot of money (or, of course, gaining) and they will do their due diligence. Suppose they are thick and throw their dosh at this and lose everything - surely, if they were that thick, they wouldn't have any money to invest in the first place! But if they do... so what? Doesn't affect us one iota.
There isn't anyone that needs saving from Roadways. It won't cause famine. There is a chance they might pull it off (and then you'll look clever when you're the goto case they learn about in inventors and business school).
Sure, slag 'em off something rotten here with your mates, but don't turn into a global vigilante.
-
I'm the one that mentioned that it could be feasible for some cases where there is no access to private roofs on post 3.
As for the earth heavier, that's not what the article says, it says that gravity will increase as the crust absorbs more water therefore increasing the crust density in "thirsty" coastal land masses and reducing the expected water level rise by 20% from prior models if memory serves me right for what the article said.
Granted, being a moderator you do as you want, but silencing a user because you don't like what his message brings is a bit too much in my opinion.
I wonder how they measure the density or the weight of the Earth's crust? Seriously that news organisation is probably equivalent to the Daily Mail in the UK.
Believe it or not planet Earth is a huge thing and we do not know as much as we think we do. What we can't dispute is that average temperatures are rising. It sounds like what people are trying to say is that just because the ocean levels are not rising it's okay. There are a lot of people who make big arguments with tiny amounts of fact that do not have much relevance to the overall picture. There are lots of people who just do not get the bigger picture.
As a moderator I do not do "as I want" and I do not "silence" people either. My role is to make sure that the rules are abided by in that things don't get out of hand and that any users intentionally disrupting the forum are removed. Danny F has caused more than his fair share of problems and on any other forum would have been banned a long time ago. We have a much looser moderation style here than other forms would and people are allowed to discuss a wide range of things but that works when people are adults. If we are going to have childish troublemakers stirring things up then we can either get rid of these people all we can to stop all discussion which has the vaguest hint of controversy making the forum a dull place. We can all have a healthy debate without turning things into a polarised row and bringing up stupid arguments mostly designed to incite the other side into equally inflammatory posts ending the whole thing in a mud slinging match.
-
I wonder how they measure the density or the weight of the Earth's crust? Seriously that news organisation is probably equivalent to the Daily Mail in the UK.
See what NASA has to say about their GRACE mission: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/overview/index.html#.Vsfn3vllNhE (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/overview/index.html#.Vsfn3vllNhE)
-
Another example (this one real) a fishing rod with a beer holder on it. For what purpose? There is no reason to put those things together and, when paired, they both perform badly.
How does one compensate on the cast to keep the beer from sloshing out? |O I would say a horrible waste of good beer but he may not have drunk good beer. :popcorn:
-
It's Baaack!
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161 (http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161)
-
It's Baaack!
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161 (http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161)
I didn't want to have to do another video on this, but it just won't die!
They even want to do crowd funding for the new Route 66 install! :palm:
-
It's Baaack!
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161 (http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/the-idea-of-solar-panel-roads-is-an-idea-that-just-wont-go-away-but-should-it/news-story/5106c0a6bcb71aaa586f81d74256a161)
To be fair, that article is a dispassionate and "fair" elaboration of the people in favour, and people against the idea. This is pathetic, but nowhere near as pathetic as articles that fail to twig to the mere thought that it might be a bad idea. It's movement in the right direction, at least (in that the detractors are even being mentioned). Even if we're short of noticing that the detractors have hard numbers to back up their claims, but never mind that.
-
There seems to be many articles at the moment about the Route 66 thing. This one seems to be the only one questioning it.
-
Says the Dutch trial was more successful than expected. Mind, the source for that is Al Jazera, and their source is a project spokesman, so.... Nevertheless, 6MWh from 70m of the stuff isn't to be sneezed at. I wouldn't mind getting that much juice for free :)
-
It is uninteresting to conclude that the idea is good or bad.
What is interesting, however, is to dissect the idea's merits and its shortcomings and figure out applications where it can excel and where it cannot.
I live in a 4th world neighbor in a 3rd world country and I can see huge advantages of having it on my driveway.
-
Says the Dutch trial was more successful than expected. Mind, the source for that is Al Jazera, and their source is a project spokesman, so.... Nevertheless, 6MWh from 70m of the stuff isn't to be sneezed at. I wouldn't mind getting that much juice for free :)
You don't get ti for free, it costs a huge amount, an the output is half what you get for a much lower cost and much longer lifespan rooftop installation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-ZSXB3KDF0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-ZSXB3KDF0)
-
it costs a huge amount
Indeed. How does that compare to, say, tarmacing the path? I think it needs to be viewed in comparison to what the cost would be of laying a path/road some other way.
an the output is half
Couple of years back we made a serious effort to go solar. At the time, the UK was promising subsidies that would have worked out at £4k/yr in our pocket after expenses for 25 years. You can imagine that we did our damndest to get something installed, and we had the space/roofs to do it too. Yet we still have no solar. Sometimes the 'best' solution isn't practical for any of many reasons. We would give a left nut to "only" get £2k/yr return from the same outlay!
-
Every single time this comes up, people need to link to the Korean solar road that is the efficient and effective way to do it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flg6eYSpYkg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flg6eYSpYkg)
The idea of using glass panels for road surfaces is impractical in many ways, and while dumber countries spend years throwing money at a pointless problem, that road in Korea is working right now.
-
:-+ Yes, this South Korean example is awesome.
Also, notice that this also has a pedestrian/bike path under the panels and you have, as Dave would say "Winner Winner Chicken Dinner". :-+
Not only would it be green in producing solar power energy, but also allow people to bike and walk which is even better. Safe and sheltered path. Also, maintenance on these panels would be easy because technicians could just travel under them to any area that needed diagnosis/repair. No shutting down the roadway.
Why the government doesn't see solar roadways as complete and utter nonsense, compared to the Korean example, just makes you want to do this.... |O
-
that road in Korea is working right now.
seems silly to put it in the median only. Why not cover the whole surface of the road? it protects against snow, sun / heat, and rain. Does make accident recovery / rescue a little difficult.
-
And the panels are at an angle for higher efficiency, which also means that rain and snow will help clean them. If that's not enough, a service cart can drive down the path and mop them off.
They won't be driven on by tractor-trailers, or heavy road construction or maintenance equipment, or people with studded snow tires or tire chains.
They won't be scraped by snowplows.
They won't be scratched by gravel and sand grains under the tires of heavy vehicles.
Dripping oil, antifreeze, and transmission fluid won't cover them, seep into the surface scratches, and be impossible to remove.
They don't need a special material or pattern etched into the glass for traction, so they don't lose solar efficiency. Nor do they need to be replaced when the traction layer wears off.
When panels do need to be replaced, it can be done without closing lanes of the road or endangering service workers.
All this, available now without special engineering or development of magic materials or testing of new traction compounds or surfaces. Practical now, at a fraction of the cost of putting solar panels into the worst possible location imaginable short of a dark basement.
-
that road in Korea is working right now.
seems silly to put it in the median only. Why not cover the whole surface of the road? it protects against snow, sun / heat, and rain. Does make accident recovery / rescue a little difficult.
If they are over the entire road, they have to be tall enough for the tallest vehicles. The support structure has to be a lot bigger, stronger, and more expensive. It would also mean maintenance is more dangerous.
Better to put additional panels over the shoulder or the outer ditch. If they are needed, anyway. It would be interesting to work out what distance of median-only panels would be enough to power an entire country.
-
If that's not enough, a service cart can drive down the path and mop them off.
Built-in sensors + heaters.
-
Think dust, not ice. Besides, electrical heating is backwards for solar panels and snow or ice. When you have power, the panel is not covered. When the panel is covered... you don't have power. (At this point, somebody suggests we just hook them to the grid, so they'll always have power. Or add batteries...)
-
electrical heating is backwards for solar panels and snow or ice.
it is backwards only for those who cannot think.
-
Also, notice that this also has a pedestrian/bike path under the panels
Noticed that, and my first thought was: where do they get on/off? I mean, sometimes you can go many many miles between junctions and I'd hate to be walking along that path knowing it's, say, 4 miles until I can get off :)
-
Also, notice that this also has a pedestrian/bike path under the panels
Noticed that, and my first thought was: where do they get on/off? I mean, sometimes you can go many many miles between junctions and I'd hate to be walking along that path knowing it's, say, 4 miles until I can get off :)
When there are overpasses/underpasses, there may be an interconnect (a stairwell) that lets you get up or down from the center of the highway to the underpass. I don't think you can cycle from the middle of the road across to the outer edge... certainly not without endangering yourself. However, at any bridges, you will probably have an escape stairwell that takes you to the edge of the road on the junction underneath. Then you can continue on your way safely.
If you are a cyclist, you will no doubt have already decided on your route and you know where and how far you are going, and having long flat stretches will be perfectly fine. 4 miles on a bike to get to the next intersection is nothing. Plus, these highways look to be in the country-side and are for long rides between neighboring suburbs or small cities anyways. You probably aren't going to want to get off in between. I wouldn't mind cycling these paths. Walking is another story. I think it's impractical for walking. Maybe jogging. Personally, I wouldn't have the patience or stamina, or fitness level. I'd bike it.
-
I'd bike it
I'd take a car - there's a jolly good roadway going that way after all :)
-
electrical heating is backwards for solar panels and snow or ice.
it is backwards only for those who cannot think.
Please enlighten us, maestro.
-
Just saw this article from the IEEE :scared:
http://transmitter.ieee.org/solar-power-hits-the-road/ (http://transmitter.ieee.org/solar-power-hits-the-road/)
Which is why IEEE membership has become utterly pointless to me. As soon as I saw the local IEEE chapter hosting Solar Roadways - this was years ago now - I googled it.
There's a lot of smart IEEE members, but I have a hell of time writing a $250 check to an organization that holds data and standards hostage from its members and simultaneously is unable to perform the fundamental arithmetic that should kill Solar Roads at the outset. IEEE is being taken over by idiots. This isn't the first time they've decided to insult their membership's intelligence.
-
The dumbshit media are still at it...Bloomberg this time rambling about solar roadways to be built on 4 continents next year! |O
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-24/solar-panel-roads-to-be-built-across-four-continents-next-year (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-24/solar-panel-roads-to-be-built-across-four-continents-next-year)
I swear the extinction of the human race will be a direct result of exponential stupidity. :bullshit:
-
.. I swear the extinction of the human race will be a direct result of exponential stupidity ...
+1
-
electrical heating is backwards for solar panels and snow or ice.
it is backwards only for those who cannot think.
Please enlighten us, maestro.
How much energy does it take to melt a kilogram of water ice? Then think that on a perfect black body absorber ( what a tarred road is basically) that you get snowfall that does not melt until spring, unless you scrape it to a thin layer with a plow and then add salt to melt the rest off. If you have a solar panel there, which is at best 15% effective ( and how much good is it under a layer of snow anyway) you still need to add a load of energy, that has to come from somewhere like say a coal power plant, and which then melts the snow, and which then promptly freezes into an ice block on leaving the heated panel, building a massive ice dam.
Compare that to a roof, where you simply can make the surface a lipophilic coating, and thus something that sheds snow easily, plus it is at an angle where it will shed with the prevailing wind as well. Self cleaning, plus at a better angle so better collection of winter sun.
-
Regarding solar roadways, its not entirely bs if the rules are actually followed. In cities however people drive bumper to bumper, outside the city on the highway people still drive close to one another which really makes this pointless.
Lets go through the points assuming people actually follow the rules while driving.
- space between cars on the highway is quite far so you can expect around 30% of road is covered during the day
- the solar could be used to power road signs and establishments nearby, its not great for a whole national grid.
- trees, being important cover pavements so solar on pavements will be limited
In the city the only place for solar is on buildings as pavements are full of people and roads full of cars. If you want to take advantage of driving rules than you could place solar roads on the yellow boxes in junctions where people arent supposed to keep their car on it (but they still do regardless making traffic jams worse). People dont follow the rules when driving, even as a pedestrians theres a few times i almost got hit just because some guy beat the red lights or decides to speed up taking a corner not on the main road (junctions, tight roads, entrances to many places like hotels) and thats in the UK.
-
Regarding solar roadways, its not entirely bs if the rules are actually followed. In cities however people drive bumper to bumper, outside the city on the highway people still drive close to one another which really makes this pointless.
Lets go through the points assuming people actually follow the rules while driving.
- space between cars on the highway is quite far so you can expect around 30% of road is covered during the day
- the solar could be used to power road signs and establishments nearby, its not great for a whole national grid.
- trees, being important cover pavements so solar on pavements will be limited
In the city the only place for solar is on buildings as pavements are full of people and roads full of cars. If you want to take advantage of driving rules than you could place solar roads on the yellow boxes in junctions where people arent supposed to keep their car on it (but they still do regardless making traffic jams worse). People dont follow the rules when driving, even as a pedestrians theres a few times i almost got hit just because some guy beat the red lights or decides to speed up taking a corner not on the main road (junctions, tight roads, entrances to many places like hotels) and thats in the UK.
Or... Just don't but bloody PV panels underneath a bloody road... :palm:
-
There are some nice solar studs around, saw them at the safety place Friday, and they are pretty nice, but never going to be a power source, just having enough power capture and storage to light some ultra high efficiency LED's during the night, and there they are fine.
There are others that are completely embedded in the road surface, with only a thick profiled glass top with integrated optical path visible, so that you have a white ( or orange for the median markers) light in one direction, with the other direction having a red light visible to the vehicles. They show low battery ( enough installed so that you can see those that are ageing) by changing to a flashing mode, though i would guess they do that in any case as night progresses, as I never travel this road after 11PM.
-
Then think that on a perfect black body absorber ( what a tarred road is basically) that you get snowfall that does not melt until spring
Whilst we're allegedly thinking here, a small point of order: a road covered with white snow isn't going to be a perfect black body absorber...
Might also be worth considering that the road is the face to a BFO heatsink. And whilst you can get a temporary boost or dip in local temperature through solar heating, half the time that's not going to be happeing. And, if we think really hard, snow usually comes from clouds which tend to be not very transparent...
Picky, I know, but people in glass houses shouldn't' swing motes (or something). :-+
-
Same argument also works for solar cells, and in any case the last time it snowed here where I live was in the last Ice Age. in any case solar cells will not be a stellar performer under snow, where you would want the solar power the most, so you do not have to throw those lumps of coal on the boiler to get the heat to make the electricity to melt the snow to make the shitty solar cells work a little.
A story from a civil engineer, who was building from plans supplied by the European Multinational Corporation, called for gutters 400mm by 400mm, all round. He queried this, and was told it was for snow loading. In the tropics, not too likely at all. But he built it as planned, because here we get frequent rainstorms that will drop 100mm of rain in an hour or two, so a large gutter and drain ( and the underground infrastructure to handle all that water as well) was not too unreasonable. Doubt that happens in a country surrounded all sides by high mountains.