this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
134 points (91.4% liked)

Technology

59689 readers
2773 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 hour ago

It's not that bad. Part of the appeal is having a black glass panel patio. A 30 year payback is ok, if it bails you out of a few power outages. Ok, its solar for rich people, but its still some clean energy.

[–] kayos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Why just use a field and use normal tested panels.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 14 points 10 hours ago

Just make covered walk ways. It's only going to get hotter anyway. Give pedestrians shade to walk under.

[–] bangupjobasusual@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Is it… lifting them 8’ off the ground that makes it impossibly expensive? Or maybe… the people in that area do not like shade?

How complicated are the electronics to ensure that the voltage dip from one panel with a table sized shadow doesn’t drag down the whole array?

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

parallel connections allows for such independence. But it requires thicker/more wiring.

[–] Cenzorrll@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

A diode would work

[–] Bezier@suppo.fi 64 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Solar freakin roadways

Not freakin again.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

In fairness, road traffic is orders of magnitude more destructive than foot traffic.

[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 2 points 3 hours ago

Right, but the last attempt was falling apart within months of instillation with very light foot tragic and weather so...

[–] anubis119@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The image of benches shading the panels really says all you need to know.

[–] morbidcactus@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

So you're saying solar freakin benches is the answer???!!!‽

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Literally just put them 2 and a half meters higher so they provide shade for sitting in the bench instead of people shading the panels.

[–] bruhduh@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

True, they should use benches like these for solar rays to pass through

[–] Bezier@suppo.fi 6 points 12 hours ago

No, I think solution is to install some SOLAR FREAKING BENCHES

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

This depends on what you're optimizing for. If you are optimizing for total energy captured per square metre, then you're right about the benches.

But suppose you have a sufficient flux even with some areas being covered so you aren't bothered by the shadows. Wouldn't it be aesthetically superior to have uniform tile types? Or would you prefer they micromanage the tile placement such that the tiles below the bench shadows are different?

Anyway, I think it is a good idea. Better than the silly solar roadways crap.

[–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 57 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Can't they just make it a roof?

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 hours ago

They are a roof tile company. This is just a thick anti slip glass layer on top of solar.

[–] thisfro@slrpnk.net 36 points 1 day ago

Yeah feels already hot from just looking at it

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

And put some goddamn plants under it.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 37 points 1 day ago (1 children)

For fuck sake!

Put solar on roofs, not where people walk/drive!

Can we please stop wasting resources on this shit?

[–] mPony@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Can we please stop wasting resources on this shit?

Not if some tech-bro can convince some gullible coked-up VC.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 day ago

Oohh, solar roadways, part 4621559

Trailer: they suck, don't work, and are made by people who have no idea what the fuck they're doing

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

When are they going to learn that solar roads are never going to be practical?

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

PV Magazine is more or less an outlet for press releases by companies trying to innovate (often in air quotes) with photovoltaics. I'm honestly not even sure why it's allowed here; it's completely uncritical. May as well cite a press release on the manufacturer's website at that point instead of laundering it through a magazine.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 day ago

We need more trees and green areas in cities to shade and cool them down, not more heat soaking open areas that heat them up!

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

Solar Roadways 2.0?

[–] BETYU@moist.catsweat.com 9 points 1 day ago

never use solar panels for side walks its a stupid idea. and there is a reason why solar panels are placed at angle and not flat on the ground.

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 4 points 1 day ago

does anyone know where I can get strong opinions about solar rods?

[–] Peer@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 day ago

Hope the predicted capability is realistic. As previously we’ve seen comparable projects be less so: https://www.dutchnews.nl/2023/07/solar-bike-path-fails-to-meet-electricity-targets-again/

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Y'all missing the whole point here.

If an area requires covering, it might as well produce some power. And cells on the ground aren't as bad as they're made out.

I have one laying flat in the yard powering a 12V water pump. Been there for 6-months, covered in pollen and dust, weeds growing over one side, grass cuttings on top, never cleaned, works fine. I have another on my shed roof at our camp. Same deal with the pollen and dust, works fine. But guess which one is easier to clean?

Cells don't have to be pristine to produce power. And if you do want to clean them? The installation pictured looks easy to work with a garden hose and squeegee, couldn't take 30 minutes. Use concrete instead? OK, now you have to power wash it. What a pain.

[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

The cells ability to produce power is directly related to how much light it gets. You'd be able to measure it. Take a reading as is. Then remove the weeds, take a reading. Then clean it, take a reading. Then point it at the sun so it's as perpendicular as you can get it, take a reading. Each time you should see an increase in output.

Panels on the ground that people are going to walk in (or drive) are going to be prone to damage. I'm fact, they've already done ground solar panel installations and they've all failed as far as I know. When placed above, you don't need to over engineer it to survive things. Concrete, can handle a lot more wear and tear, as well as being easy to repair and recycles really well.

Basically, there's an objectively better way to use the panels.