Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Solar powered - intelligent - Roads...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNMFKKyFU60[/youtube]

Kudos to them for trying to improve the world...

...but, speaking as a third generation engineer (the first two transportation/civil), I am dubious about the viability as a load bearing element. There's a reason why concrete is the preferred component.

Since you're the energy wizard, do the consumption/production numbers even come close? Seems like the grid design would need to include every sq/in of surface area to support even roadway transportation.What happens to rail, airway, marine, and non-transportation?

I've dealt with more than a few of these green ideas, but spending $8,000/sf for a product with a 1/yr +/- duty cycle is nuts.

travelinman67 wrote:Kudos to them for trying to improve the world...

...but, speaking as a third generation engineer (the first two transportation/civil), I am dubious about the viability as a load bearing element. There's a reason why concrete is the preferred component.

Since you're the energy wizard, do the consumption/production numbers even come close? Seems like the grid design would need to include every sq/in of surface area to support even roadway transportation.What happens to rail, airway, marine, and non-transportation?

I've dealt with more than a few of these green ideas, but spending $8,000/sf for a product with a 1/yr +/- duty cycle is nuts.

where did it say that?

travelinman67 wrote:Kudos to them for trying to improve the world...

...but, speaking as a third generation engineer (the first two transportation/civil), I am dubious about the viability as a load bearing element. There's a reason why concrete is the preferred component.

Since you're the energy wizard, do the consumption/production numbers even come close? Seems like the grid design would need to include every sq/in of surface area to support even roadway transportation.What happens to rail, airway, marine, and non-transportation?

I've dealt with more than a few of these green ideas, but spending $8,000/sf for a product with a 1/yr +/- duty cycle is nuts.

The consumption/production numbers are so bad they rival only military coefficient/variation numbers
Like Hellfire or AIM-9 sidewinder type dollars vs. return



And we only have $700 Billion dollars for that stuff...
(and nothing else) regardless of the power of the idea - only the military gets to fiddle about in this territory its so cost prohibitive...

but this project does have the attention of the Military in that a few carriers are considering it...

travelinman67 wrote:Kudos to them for trying to improve the world...

...but, speaking as a third generation engineer (the first two transportation/civil), I am dubious about the viability as a load bearing element. There's a reason why concrete is the preferred component.

Since you're the energy wizard, do the consumption/production numbers even come close? Seems like the grid design would need to include every sq/in of surface area to support even roadway transportation.What happens to rail, airway, marine, and non-transportation?

I've dealt with more than a few of these green ideas, but spending $8,000/sf for a product with a 1/yr +/- duty cycle is nuts.

What happens to it with respect to what? How does having roadways collecting solar energy affect rail, marine, airway, and whatever non-transportation means at all?

houndawg wrote: URP!
?

This is above your pay grade, Densedawg. Go stalk Alphie, Baldy, JSO or AZ for awhile.

travelinman67 wrote:

houndawg wrote: URP!
?

This is above your pay grade, Densedawg. Go stalk Alphie, Baldy, JSO or AZ for awhile.

Where are your manners Mr..?
I can't take you anywhere

Chizzang wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:Kudos to them for trying to improve the world...

...but, speaking as a third generation engineer (the first two transportation/civil), I am dubious about the viability as a load bearing element. There's a reason why concrete is the preferred component.

Since you're the energy wizard, do the consumption/production numbers even come close? Seems like the grid design would need to include every sq/in of surface area to support even roadway transportation.What happens to rail, airway, marine, and non-transportation?

I've dealt with more than a few of these green ideas, but spending $8,000/sf for a product with a 1/yr +/- duty cycle is nuts.

The consumption/production numbers are so bad they rival only military coefficient/variation numbers
Like Hellfire or AIM-9 sidewinder type dollars vs. return



And we only have $700 Billion dollars for that stuff...
(and nothing else) regardless of the power of the idea - only the military gets to fiddle about in this territory its so cost prohibitive...

but this project does have the attention of the Military in that a few carriers are considering it...

I don't have a problem investing in a scalable solution that's promising, but the design issues shoot this horse at the gate. Assuming a cost effective ceramic could be developed, it would be suspended over the cells, but on top of a framework/bed that would carry the load? Low speed/low gvw parking areas, probably, but not the highway...and like I said...it leaves HUGE gaps.

You think it's worth it?

travelinman67 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
The consumption/production numbers are so bad they rival only military coefficient/variation numbers
Like Hellfire or AIM-9 sidewinder type dollars vs. return



And we only have $700 Billion dollars for that stuff...
(and nothing else) regardless of the power of the idea - only the military gets to fiddle about in this territory its so cost prohibitive...

but this project does have the attention of the Military in that a few carriers are considering it...

I don't have a problem investing in a scalable solution that's promising, but the design issues shoot this horse at the gate. Assuming a cost effective ceramic could be developed, it would be suspended over the cells, but on top of a framework/bed that would carry the load? Low speed/low gvw parking areas, probably, but not the highway...and like I said...it leaves HUGE gaps.

You think it's worth it?

Do I think it's worth it?
Meh... not today, no

But long after you and I are dead this will be pretty much the way roads are made / and roofs / and any top floor of anything in the sun and airport runways etc. etc.

Chizzang wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
I don't have a problem investing in a scalable solution that's promising, but the design issues shoot this horse at the gate. Assuming a cost effective ceramic could be developed, it would be suspended over the cells, but on top of a framework/bed that would carry the load? Low speed/low gvw parking areas, probably, but not the highway...and like I said...it leaves HUGE gaps.

You think it's worth it?

Do I think it's worth it?
Meh... not today, no

But long after you and I are dead this will be pretty much the way roads are made / and roofs / and any top floor of anything in the sun and airport runways etc. etc.

Logically, fusion/superconducting cables would be cheaper and more efficient, but...

...sound-bite brainless Americans will likely prevent any atomic energy development.

all that creative energy would be better spent perfecting a fembot or something

travelinman67 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Do I think it's worth it?
Meh... not today, no

But long after you and I are dead this will be pretty much the way roads are made / and roofs / and any top floor of anything in the sun and airport runways etc. etc.

Logically, fusion/superconducting cables would be cheaper and more efficient, but...

...sound-bite brainless Americans will likely prevent any atomic energy development.

Maybe it can be revisited after enough fracking has been done to provide more fault lines to build the reactors on top of.

houndawg wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
Logically, fusion/superconducting cables would've be cheaper and more efficient, but...

...sound-bite brainless Americans will likely prevent any atomic energy development.

Maybe it can be revisited after enough fracking has been done to provide more fault lines to build the reactors on top of.

Deja vu...

...Right on cue.

CID1990 wrote:all that creative energy would be better spent perfecting a fembot or something

The only creative energy that seems to really payoff on a National level is the art of killing
Make a better missile = you are rewarded to the tune of BILLION$ of dollars
Say you can make a better jet fighter (even if you really can't) and you are rewarded with BILLION$

Make a better fuel cell (nada)
Make a better photovoltaic device (nada)
Make a better Hydrogen Reactor (nada)

Make a better bomb = Win


Making the world a better place is far to risky of an investment for our Federal Government
Capitalizing on fear and hatred (Bingo) We got funds falling out of our asses for that - both parties - no matter who the president is... we got funds for that / unending PILES OF MONEY

Chizzang wrote:

CID1990 wrote:all that creative energy would be better spent perfecting a fembot or something

The only creative energy that seems to really payoff on a National level is the art of killing
Make a better missile = you are rewarded to the tune of BILLION$ of dollars
Say you can make a better jet fighter (even if you really can't) and you are rewarded with BILLION$

Make a better fuel cell (nada)
Make a better photovoltaic device (nada)
Make a better Hydrogen Reactor (nada)

Make a better bomb = Win


Making the world a better place is far to risky of an investment for our Federal Government
Capitalizing on fear and hatred (Bingo) We got funds falling out of our asses for that - both parties - no matter who the president is... we got funds for that

All of those things are socialist pursuits, Chizz. Don't you remember all the mouth-foaming over Solyndra, et al?

Grizalltheway wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
The only creative energy that seems to really payoff on a National level is the art of killing
Make a better missile = you are rewarded to the tune of BILLION$ of dollars
Say you can make a better jet fighter (even if you really can't) and you are rewarded with BILLION$

Make a better fuel cell (nada)
Make a better photovoltaic device (nada)
Make a better Hydrogen Reactor (nada)

Make a better bomb = Win


Making the world a better place is far to risky of an investment for our Federal Government
Capitalizing on fear and hatred (Bingo) We got funds falling out of our asses for that - both parties - no matter who the president is... we got funds for that

All of those things are socialist pursuits, Chizz. Don't you remember all the mouth-foaming over Solyndra, et al?

Meh... that was a $500 million dollar bed wetting
You know there is still $150 Million dollars still available from that program - just sitting out there - to be loaned to the next project

But anyway:
What I'm talking about is BILLIONS / Millions is kids stuff... heck we (America) were quoted that each F-22 would cost about $135 Million... but it's something like $675 million each - and that's just the 50% they can keep in the air... the damn thing is impossible to keep flying

$500 million is less than one F-22
and we've got something like Qty. 48 F-22 that can't even get off the ground / Solyndra my ass

travelinman67 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Do I think it's worth it?
Meh... not today, no

But long after you and I are dead this will be pretty much the way roads are made / and roofs / and any top floor of anything in the sun and airport runways etc. etc.

Logically, fusion/superconducting cables would be cheaper and more efficient, but...

...sound-bite brainless Americans will likely prevent any atomic energy development.

I'm a proponent of fusion and room temp superconductor research, but there's a part of me that thinks they might be pipe dreams. Some things just aren't possible no matter what motivational posters in middle schools say.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
The only creative energy that seems to really payoff on a National level is the art of killing
Make a better missile = you are rewarded to the tune of BILLION$ of dollars
Say you can make a better jet fighter (even if you really can't) and you are rewarded with BILLION$

Make a better fuel cell (nada)
Make a better photovoltaic device (nada)
Make a better Hydrogen Reactor (nada)

Make a better bomb = Win


Making the world a better place is far to risky of an investment for our Federal Government
Capitalizing on fear and hatred (Bingo) We got funds falling out of our asses for that - both parties - no matter who the president is... we got funds for that

All of those things are socialist pursuits, Chizz. Don't you remember all the mouth-foaming over Solyndra, et al?

Hey Einstein, the "mouth foaming" wasn't because of the LOSS, it was because of the typical Obama shady politics of him greasing the palm of his fund-raiser buddy KNOWING the company was going down the tubes. If that doesn't piss YOU off too, that politicans are that cavalier with your tax dollars, then there's no hope for you. I couldn't care less whether there are losses in the run-up to a new energy technology....just not THOSE kind of losses.

Pwns wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
Logically, fusion/superconducting cables would be cheaper and more efficient, but...

...sound-bite brainless Americans will likely prevent any atomic energy development.

I'm a proponent of fusion and room temp superconductor research, but there's a part of me that thinks they might be pipe dreams. Some things just aren't possible no matter what motivational posters in middle schools say.

You don't think superconducting cabling is viable in urban areas?

AZGrizFan wrote:

Hey Einstein, the "mouth foaming" wasn't because of the LOSS, it was because of the typical Obama shady politics of him greasing the palm of his fund-raiser buddy KNOWING the company was going down the tubes. If that doesn't piss YOU off too, that politicans are that cavalier with your tax dollars, then there's no hope for you. I couldn't care less whether there are losses in the run-up to a new energy technology....just not THOSE kind of losses.

Agreed,
There are too many "Pet" tax dollar feeding holes for hundreds of millions to be stuffed in...
Frankly this - what you're pointing out here AZ - is what's killing America

There are just too many examples of this behavior

It's not about what's best for America anymore
It's about who you owe a favor to - that got you in power - and how to conceal the favor inside something else while tripling the dollar amount and paying off the political bystanders who know the truth

it's sad

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

Hey Einstein, the "mouth foaming" wasn't because of the LOSS, it was because of the typical Obama shady politics of him greasing the palm of his fund-raiser buddy KNOWING the company was going down the tubes. If that doesn't piss YOU off too, that politicans are that cavalier with your tax dollars, then there's no hope for you. I couldn't care less whether there are losses in the run-up to a new energy technology....just not THOSE kind of losses.

Agreed,
There are too many "Pet" tax dollar feeding holes for hundreds of millions to be stuffed in...
Frankly this - what you're pointing out here AZ - is what's killing America

There are just too many examples of this behavior

It's not about what's best for America anymore
It's about who you owe a favor to - that got you in power - and how to conceal the favor inside something else while tripling the dollar amount and paying off the political bystanders who know the truth

it's sad

As long as you understand this has nothing to do with campaign finance. Now...run along you silly little liberal idealist.