I wanted to read all the previous post before saying anything but I see that swearing and speculating about who's gonna steal the money is done more often than commenting the actual issue.
All I wanted to say is that I find it rather disappointing to see engineers with zero faith and arguing endlessly against something. Especially if it's an unfair argument. This is the quality of an engineer who can only do what's been done before. Where will you hide when it will be done in 10-15 years time? Are you the ones who make up problems or the ones who teach the rest how to do stuff? Have faith my friends, it there's a problem then solve it, figure shit out.
I wanted to read all the previous post before saying anything but I see that swearing and speculating about who's gonna steal the money is done more often than commenting the actual issue.
All I wanted to say is that I find it rather disappointing to see engineers with zero faith and arguing endlessly against something. Especially if it's an unfair argument. This is the quality of an engineer who can only do what's been done before. Where will you hide when it will be done in 10-15 years time? Are you the ones who make up problems or the ones who teach the rest how to do stuff? Have faith my friends, it there's a problem then solve it, figure shit out.
What I'm saying it that I consider it primitive to make up stuff as part of an argument against something just because you don't like the idea or you THINK it's not doable. Even worse to blow somebody else's trumpet without doing your OWN calculations and experiments. This thing didn't get a fair trial.
I think you calculated the return as $33/m2/year. in your calculations a road is 8m wide. A 150km piece of road, let's say a test road would return $40 million in a year. And let's say it's shit. The worst road ever. You can't stop on it, you can't see the LED's and all that. $40million as return in a year is surely enough to try it again. And again and again.
can you not come up with 10-15 examples to something that we have now and seemed impossible before? Do you need help?
Rob, I'm not saying that it is possible. Maybe it's not, I can't tell from sitting in a chair (and I don't think anybody of you can either).
What I'm saying it that I consider it primitive to make up stuff as part of an argument against something just because you don't like the idea or you THINK it's not doable. Even worse to blow somebody else's trumpet without doing your OWN calculations and experiments. This thing didn't get a fair trial.
Create less horrible conditions.
If pointing the LED up is horrible because it wouldn't be visible then how about not pointing them up as a start? Done. One problem less.
Let's just say that you don't know how to make it happen.
I think you calculated the return as $33/m2/year. in your calculations a road is 8m wide. A 150km piece of road, let's say a test road would return $40 million in a year. And let's say it's shit. The worst road ever. You can't stop on it, you can't see the LED's and all that. $40million as return in a year is surely enough to try it again. And again and again.
Well, they spent 800k USD without sufficiently answering lots of questions, addressing lots of issues raised, they delete comments on their youtube channel asking for clarification, reaction or criticism, leaving only praise - which is not peer review, the basis for science. Which is fishy at the best of times.
under the most horrible unoptimised conditions possible
Create less horrible conditions. If pointing the LED up is horrible because it wouldn't be visible then how about not pointing them up as a start? Done. One problem less.
The LED problem is a complete red herring! It doesn't matter
I could engineer a way to make the LEDs work (at extra cost), but that is beside the point.
Rob, I'm not saying that it is possible. Maybe it's not, I can't tell from sitting in a chair (and I don't think anybody of you can either). What I'm saying it that I consider it primitive to make up stuff as part of an argument against something just because you don't like the idea or you THINK it's not doable. Even worse to blow somebody else's trumpet without doing your OWN calculations and experiments. This thing didn't get a fair trial. Normally before I say that something is impossible I try first. Not once, fifty times. (How many times did you try to ride your bike before it actually happened? Once? I don't think so. And that's so easy that even a 5 years old can do that.) And then all it means that _I_ can't do it. This is how things go forward. Nobody believes in something, then on dude makes it happen. Then the rest learns. You are the rest. I expect engineers to be way more creative. This is what I'm saying. And I'm not arguing about this, I'm saying it as my opinion.
If they only put the panels on bends that face into the sun and inclined them NASCAR style, would that help? If not, they should do it anyway.
Sync: First thing what comes to my mind is the $40 million profit from a 150k stretch of road vs the $0 profit of an asphalt road.
Your calculations what you've done from your chair show a $33 profit per m^2 which is a LOT.
Sync: First thing what comes to my mind is the $40 million profit from a 150k stretch of road vs the $0 profit of an asphalt road.Please proof the $40 million profit. I want to see the calculation.
Please proof the $40 million profit. I want to see the calculation.
Please proof the $40 million profit. I want to see the calculation.
He's technically right based on my generous best case number of $33/sqm.
8m x 150,000m x $33/sqm/year = $40M / year potential income.
Of course he forgot to include the cost of system which I ballpark estimate at $2.2BN
Your calculations what you've done from your chair show a $33 profit per m^2 which is a LOT.
You can challenge me all you want. I accept your calculations, they show that there's quite a lot of energy left even after the LED trick, + there's a huge return on that AND it surly will trigger unprecedented improvement of the solar energy technology.
I don't understand why you all worry about how much money they got. What dies it matter rom engineering point of view?
About maintenance and replacement: current existing roads also have this problem without making a penny.
He's technically right based on my generous best case number of $33/sqm.
8m x 150,000m x $33/sqm/year = $40M / year potential income.
Of course he forgot to include the cost of system which I ballpark estimate at $2.2BN
engineers with zero faith
arguing endlessly against something.
And we have a lot of snow.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/23/3451684/future-of-solar-technology/