|
Because after the blizzard, people won't want to wait the days it will take to melt the snow off the road. Remember they only want to keep the road a few degrees above freezing.
So, when you said, "Let us assume that the snow melting works"... what you meant was that you were assuming the snow melting wouldn't work.
Fascinating.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would prefer the batteries and be free of the grid but some areas are making that illegalIf you've got solar installed and you're on the grid? Absolutely. It's rarely enough to make a net profit (and the billing may not allow it), but it's sure better than getting batteries to store the power for when you do need it.Kryzbyn , right now what happens is your electricity meter runs backwards, and the electric company pays you money if you generate more than you use.Seriously?If you've got enough solar to be free of the grid, that's a possibility. Batteries on that scale are expensive though.
Most people won't be able to fit or afford enough solar to cover their needs year round, so they'll want access to the grid anyway. Given that, selling excess to the grid and buying it back when you need it makes a lot of sense.
I love that that is an option, i am just bothered by government action to stop people from being completely apart from the grid and having no dependency on anyone else to supply power. To me the true beauty of solar is not "save the planet" it is the independence it can offer for a shrinking price, even if that independence comes with the need to use less electricity overall
Good gods have you never heard the term prototype before?LEDs work during daytime. Maybe not the exact ones he has installed, but they're still LEDs. They still have very long life span and low power usage. They're also quite effective.These solar freakin road panels have about 20 christmas lights on each of them, and I imagine they won't look like much when the sun is up.Also from the FAQ
I suppose they could just be lying, but it's not as if they haven't thought about these things.Will the LEDs even show up in direct sunlight?
Yes. For the prototype though, we found that the LEDs we chose were not quite bright enough during the daytime. We don't anticipate any problems as there are LED stop lights and billboards everywhere that are very bright even in direct sunlight. At night our LEDs are almost too bright. We made them adjustable so we turn them down at night. We can also turn them off entirely if no vehicles are on the road.
They have not shown that it can be done. It's LED lights, hypothetically the same LED lights that are on a car's brakes might work, but for some reason the prototype's lights aren't visible during the daylight. This little factoid, of course, never stopped them from advertizing a system where road lines, alert notices like "warning: moose is crossing the road up ahead," and such are possible.
But let's give them 2 million dollars, because a hexagonal grid covered with solar panels and now LED brake lights just needs the kinks worked out?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is, I am pretty convinced, b!+@@$!% of the highest order. At best it's a practical failure that f#!$s up fast and in an obvious way. At worst it's a gigantic scam that takes down a measurable portion of the US road infrastructure with it.
LEDs are not going to be visible in sunlight. Glass isn't going to remain clear, nor is it going to be anything but a hazard with a crash (a pretty bad thing in itself that doesn't get better for glass shards sprayed across the countryside). That it could melt snow as described to keep the road clear (at a time where no power is accumulating due to snowfall...) is the kind of stupid that only someone who never really saw snow could buy into. But worst of all: It's so hideously expensive to implement that even IF they spent ludicrous amounts for it, and everything works precisely as well as they say, all they would get is a street corner somewhere, that can not be maintained with wear and tear.
Let them have their two million dollars. Let them show everyone why it's not a good idea. It's pocket change to the traffic authorities, and the project MIGHT generate some sort of valuable insight.
Edit: Oh, one more thing. Putting electronics out across roads all over the country is going to make a lot of people depending on scavenging stuff to sell very happy. People cut down drainpipes and such for scrap metal... yeah.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Around here, copper wiring is hot. You can get big money.
Well, LED's that are visible in sunlight already exist in many places. Ever been to Hampton Roads, they're all over the place.
Well, LED's that are visible in sunlight already exist in many places. Ever been to Hampton Roads, they're all over the place.
Are they on the ground like road reflectors? Or perpendicular to the ground like a road sign/car brake light?
I've been to Falls Church. In 1989.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is, I am pretty convinced, b$@@@##$ of the highest order. At best it's a practical failure that f!@@s up fast and in an obvious way. At worst it's a gigantic scam that takes down a measurable portion of the US road infrastructure with it.
LEDs are not going to be visible in sunlight. Glass isn't going to remain clear, nor is it going to be anything but a hazard with a crash (a pretty bad thing in itself that doesn't get better for glass shards sprayed across the countryside). That it could melt snow as described to keep the road clear (at a time where no power is accumulating due to snowfall...) is the kind of stupid that only someone who never really saw snow could buy into. But worst of all: It's so hideously expensive to implement that even IF they spent ludicrous amounts for it, and everything works precisely as well as they say, all they would get is a street corner somewhere, that can not be maintained with wear and tear.
Let them have their two million dollars. Let them show everyone why it's not a good idea. It's pocket change to the traffic authorities, and the project MIGHT generate some sort of valuable insight.
Edit: Oh, one more thing. Putting electronics out across roads all over the country is going to make a lot of people depending on scavenging stuff to sell very happy. People cut down drainpipes and such for scrap metal... yeah.
All I have to say is Sissyl and I are in total, 100% agreement.
This will probably never happen again. It's a sign. You should all pay heed to our counsel.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, LED's that are visible in sunlight already exist in many places. Ever been to Hampton Roads, they're all over the place.Are they on the ground like road reflectors? Or perpendicular to the ground like a road sign/car brake light?
I think what we have here are people in different parts of the country- and the world- going on what they see on a day to day basis and making their judgements from there- for example, led lights are indeed on road signs at all times of day and are quite visible IN MY EXPERIENCE ONLY. In my opinion only, I think what's being proposed here is far from impossible, although it is unlikely. The price tag is unpalatable, and I would like to like to see more evidence before putting money towards it. I am also aware that there is a lot of money to be made in killing this project (or at least pockets that would be lined) so I am quite skeptical of those who would bring up absolutes and dismiss it out of hand, especially when its hard for me to see their faces from atop their ivory tower- professional or not.
Around here, copper wiring is hot. You can get big money.
indeed, this is a concern as well.
Around here, copper wiring is hot. You can get big money.indeed, this is a concern as well.
Not just the concern; it's the primary reason why it won't work.
Around here, the only reason they're not stripping power from the utility lines is that the lines happen to be live. But that still hasn't stopped them from stealing repair materials (to the point both the state and city no longer leave them unattended) to strip for copper. And I've heard that some have actually managed to strip some of the less-energetic utilities anyway.
To be honest, putting those down here would just result in entire sections of the road going missing.
Unless, of course, they successfully kill the recycling industry... The lack of ability to recycle copper would resolve this just fine.
Yeah, and all you need to do then is make sure you can accurately track every ounce of copper. I mean, it's not like anyone could melt it down or the like, right?
You claimed LED lights wouldn't be visible during the day.Are you standing by that claim?
I don't want you to move the goalposts, modify your claim, or any kind of b*~!&#!&. Yes or no, do you stand by the claim?
I want you to find where you think I said "LED lights wouldn't be visible during the day." And when you read my exact statement, you'll have my answer.
Oh. Never mind; I think this is what you were referring to when you were trying to challenge what I said.
"I think the fact that he's an electrical engineer and he's trying to sell the fact that LED Christmas lights are going to work during the daytime, with the sun shining and everything, to provide traffic lanes/parking lanes/what have you is what we call in the b~&*&+~@ter detection business a big "tell." He's shoveling it pretty thick right there. Nobody noticed except ThunderfOOt."
Bolded text is a far cry from saying "led lights, including big ass tv billboard style signs don't work during the day."
So, yes; I think if you put a big ass led tv screen billboard down and you used it as a parking lot, it would be real expensive, and it would break real easy. It's like I can't let my kids throw a tennis ball in the living room. I hope they never drive a Honda Civic on my television.
You're making comments of derision against the LED concept. I want to know, are you standing by your claims that LEDs won't work during the day? We can get into the issue of cost/power consumption/density later. Right now I just want this one simple concept to be extremely clear.
Do you think LEDs can be visible during the day?
Please, don't add superfluous attacks on me, someone else, sarcasm, or other useless statements trying to distract from this very simple question. Just answer it. Because the erroneous comments you're making have so many flaws and errors, we need to take this one step at a time. You said the burden is on me, I'm not asking you to "prove" anything, just play along. It'll actually be LESS work for you if you keep your reply simple and to the point.
it's a snake oil scam.
I love how he is going off on the melting of the snow as inefficient and a terible idea. He has obviously never been in the northern US during winter. It costs my parents $200 a snowfall to get a plow to clear their driveway, and it may not come by for a few days. If he thinks companies/homeowners wont want to eliminate that cost for their parking lots, he delusional.
Edit: Not to mention that I have seen these types of systems to clear snow before. They work, often well.
You claimed LED lights wouldn't be visible during the day.Are you standing by that claim?
I don't want you to move the goalposts, modify your claim, or any kind of b*~!&#!&. Yes or no, do you stand by the claim?
I want you to find where you think I said "LED lights wouldn't be visible during the day." And when you read my exact statement, you'll have my answer.
Oh. Never mind; I think this is what you were referring to when you were trying to challenge what I said.
"I think the fact that he's an electrical engineer and he's trying to sell the fact that LED Christmas lights are going to work during the daytime, with the sun shining and everything, to provide traffic lanes/parking lanes/what have you is what we call in the b~&*&+~@ter detection business a big "tell." He's shoveling it pretty thick right there. Nobody noticed except ThunderfOOt."
Bolded text is a far cry from saying "led lights, including big ass tv billboard style signs don't work during the day."
So, yes; I think if you put a big ass led tv screen billboard down and you used it as a parking lot, it would be real expensive, and it would break real easy. It's like I can't let my kids throw a tennis ball in the living room. I hope they never drive a Honda Civic on my television.
You're making comments of derision against the LED concept. I want to know, are you standing by your claims that LEDs won't work during the day? We can get into the issue of cost/power consumption/density later. Right now I just want this one simple concept to be extremely clear.
Do you think LEDs can be visible during the day?
Please, don't add superfluous attacks on me, someone else, sarcasm, or other useless statements trying to distract from this very simple question. Just answer it. Because the erroneous comments you're making have so many flaws and errors, we need to take this one step at a time. You said the burden is on me, I'm not asking...
Okay. One step at a time.
1. I never said "LED lights, in any way shape or form, will not be visible during the day," and I had thought that by requoting and bolding what I actually said, it would be bountifully apparent to you that your fallacious statement, i.e. "my claims that LEDs won't work during the day," falls apart under attentive scrutiny.
2. Let me requote what I said for the third time, even though it's quoted above. Tell me if you can see where my statement only superficially resembles the statement you seem insistent on proving I said:
"I think the fact that he's an electrical engineer and he's trying to sell the fact that LED Christmas lights are going to work during the daytime, with the sun shining and everything, to provide traffic lanes/parking lanes/what have you is what we call in the b~&*&+~@ter detection business a big "tell." He's shoveling it pretty thick right there. Nobody noticed except ThunderfOOt."
"LED Christmas lights" is my descriptor of the lights that the engineer has installed on the solar panel hexagons in question.
Now, here's the catch: the burden of proof indeed lies upon you to prove that "LED Christmas lights" is equal to saying "LED's do not work during the day in any and all circumstances."
If you find this insulting, I'm frankly insulted that you not only condescendingly put words in my mouth, want to rinse and repeat, and have the gall to cry foul as well. Until you actually can quote to me where I said the latter, as you seem insistent on erroneously claiming and reclaiming, I got nothing else to add.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you've got solar installed and you're on the grid? Absolutely. It's rarely enough to make a net profit (and the billing may not allow it), but it's sure better than getting batteries to store the power for when you do need it.Kryzbyn , right now what happens is your electricity meter runs backwards, and the electric company pays you money if you generate more than you use.Seriously?
Hmm I will consider this.
If it doesn't take too long for it to pay itself off, why not?| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you've got solar installed and you're on the grid? Absolutely. It's rarely enough to make a net profit (and the billing may not allow it), but it's sure better than getting batteries to store the power for when you do need it.Kryzbyn , right now what happens is your electricity meter runs backwards, and the electric company pays you money if you generate more than you use.Seriously?Hmm I will consider this.
If it doesn't take too long for it to pay itself off, why not?
Check your local laws. Some states do not require the electric companies to pay you back.
Also, there are companies that will rent your roof and own/maintain the solar panels for you. A company I have heard of local to me will guarantee a static cost per KW for 10 years (as opposed to the 5% annual increase the electric companies get) in exchange for you allowing them to put them up.| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would prefer the batteries and be free of the grid but some areas are making that illegal
Something about people with 20 used car batteries leaking heavy metals into everyone's well water wasn't quite working out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
LEDs that are installed on runways.
LEDs used for marking crosswalks.
Those are just some of the flat ones. If you can use raised markers (like in areas that don't use snow plows), the options are more plentiful.
Of course, these have the disadvantage of requiring wires to be run through the pavement. If the road surface inherently required wires to be installed, that would be a non-issue.
There are some engineering concerns with the glass, refraction/reflection, but that is stuff engineers have literally been dealing with for over 200 years and is pretty firmly understood science.
Because after the blizzard, people won't want to wait the days it will take to melt the snow off the road. Remember they only want to keep the road a few degrees above freezing.So, when you said, "Let us assume that the snow melting works"... what you meant was that you were assuming the snow melting wouldn't work.
Fascinating.
No, but I am also assuming that the they aren't changing the laws of physics. Melting that much snow with that little of a temperature difference takes time. It even takes time with a high temperature difference.
Pull an ice cube out of your freezer and set it out on the counter, then time how long it takes to melt. Then do the same by putting it in your refrigerator. (Yes ice is a bit different than snow, but you are also melting from all sides, instead of one, plus this road will have to deal with ice storms, sleet, snow, and rain.)
Hmmm, I wonder how well they plan on anchoring this to the subsurface, it would be bad if a tornado turned the panels into frisbees, something that rarely happens to asphalt or concrete roads. Tornadoes have pulled up manhole covers.
If you've got solar installed and you're on the grid? Absolutely. It's rarely enough to make a net profit (and the billing may not allow it), but it's sure better than getting batteries to store the power for when you do need it.Kryzbyn , right now what happens is your electricity meter runs backwards, and the electric company pays you money if you generate more than you use.Seriously?Hmm I will consider this.
If it doesn't take too long for it to pay itself off, why not?Check your local laws. Some states do not require the electric companies to pay you back.
Also, there are companies that will rent your roof and own/maintain the solar panels for you. A company I have heard of local to me will guarantee a static cost per KW for 10 years (as opposed to the 5% annual increase the electric companies get) in exchange for you allowing them to put them up.
Thanks for the tip, I'll look into this.
We have a nuke plant here, so electricity costs aren't too bad, but every little bit helps.
Because after the blizzard, people won't want to wait the days it will take to melt the snow off the road. Remember they only want to keep the road a few degrees above freezing.So, when you said, "Let us assume that the snow melting works"... what you meant was that you were assuming the snow melting wouldn't work.
Fascinating.
No, but I am also assuming that the they aren't changing the laws of physics. Melting that much snow with that little of a temperature difference takes time. It even takes time with a high temperature difference.
Pull an ice cube out of your freezer and set it out on the counter, then time how long it takes to melt. Then do the same by putting it in your refrigerator. (Yes ice is a bit different than snow, but you are also melting from all sides, instead of one, plus this road will have to deal with ice storms, sleet, snow, and rain.)
Hmmm, I wonder how well they plan on anchoring this to the subsurface, it would be bad if a tornado turned the panels into frisbees, something that rarely happens to asphalt or concrete roads. Tornadoes have pulled up manhole covers.
Aye.
Tornado of '75 that hit Omaha left corkscrew gouges in the concrete it went over. It went down a portion of 84 th street. Messed it all up.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love that that is an option, i am just bothered by government action to stop people from being completely apart from the grid and having no dependency on anyone else to supply power. To me the true beauty of solar is not "save the planet" it is the independence it can offer for a shrinking price, even if that independence comes with the need to use less electricity overallI would prefer the batteries and be free of the grid but some areas are making that illegalIf you've got solar installed and you're on the grid? Absolutely. It's rarely enough to make a net profit (and the billing may not allow it), but it's sure better than getting batteries to store the power for when you do need it.Kryzbyn , right now what happens is your electricity meter runs backwards, and the electric company pays you money if you generate more than you use.Seriously?If you've got enough solar to be free of the grid, that's a possibility. Batteries on that scale are expensive though.
Most people won't be able to fit or afford enough solar to cover their needs year round, so they'll want access to the grid anyway. Given that, selling excess to the grid and buying it back when you need it makes a lot of sense.
You don't actually want the batteries right now. They're expensive and as people use them more, prohibitively so. Current battery tech requires precious/rare metals, like platinum.
In a few years, it's possible that could all change though.
I'm with you on allowing people to get off the grid, I just don't want it to be done in dangerous ways, specifically in ways that my neighbors could endanger me.
Because after the blizzard, people won't want to wait the days it will take to melt the snow off the road. Remember they only want to keep the road a few degrees above freezing.So, when you said, "Let us assume that the snow melting works"... what you meant was that you were assuming the snow melting wouldn't work.
Fascinating.
No, but I am also assuming that the they aren't changing the laws of physics. Melting that much snow with that little of a temperature difference takes time. It even takes time with a high temperature difference.
Pull an ice cube out of your freezer and set it out on the counter, then time how long it takes to melt. Then do the same by putting it in your refrigerator. (Yes ice is a bit different than snow, but you are also melting from all sides, instead of one, plus this road will have to deal with ice storms, sleet, snow, and rain.)
Hmmm, I wonder how well they plan on anchoring this to the subsurface, it would be bad if a tornado turned the panels into frisbees, something that rarely happens to asphalt or concrete roads. Tornadoes have pulled up manhole covers.
yeah, but your not melting an ice cube. You're melting shaved ice being slowly applied. Surface area and thermal mass matter. Also, how is this system significantly different than car rear windshields?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm, I wonder how well they plan on anchoring this to the subsurface, it would be bad if a tornado turned the panels into frisbees, something that rarely happens to asphalt or concrete roads. Tornadoes have pulled up manhole covers.
Pavement scouring can and does happen. It's more likely on thinner, low traffic, rural roads, but it does happen.
I do think it's a good point though and something to consider. That said, in areas of population, there are already a massive number of things that tornadoes pick up and cause damage with.
In '98 my brother had just bought his first house. A tornado ripped through town, it missed his neighborhood, but he had to replace all the siding on two sides of the house because of damage from thrown debris.
I don't know how likely it would be that the panels would be picked up. If they are picked up, I don't know if they would directly contribute to an increase in damage. I think if you look at the area where a tornado hits directly, you won't see an increase in damage, because the damage is usually already complete and absolute. Homes are already torn to shreds.
Since the direct path isn't really going to be changed, what about the indirect damage. How close and how powerful does the tornado need to be to rip up panels? How far does it throw them?
If it only picks up panels in it's direct path and it doesn't throw them very far, I think the difference in presence/non-presence of the panels will be insignificant. I highly doubt anyone here (or possibly anywhere right now) could answer this question to a high degree of certainty. It is something to consider/test though.
yeah, but your not melting an ice cube. You're melting shaved ice being slowly applied. Surface area and thermal mass matter. Also, how is this system significantly different than car rear windshields?Because after the blizzard, people won't want to wait the days it will take to melt the snow off the road. Remember they only want to keep the road a few degrees above freezing.So, when you said, "Let us assume that the snow melting works"... what you meant was that you were assuming the snow melting wouldn't work.
Fascinating.
No, but I am also assuming that the they aren't changing the laws of physics. Melting that much snow with that little of a temperature difference takes time. It even takes time with a high temperature difference.
Pull an ice cube out of your freezer and set it out on the counter, then time how long it takes to melt. Then do the same by putting it in your refrigerator. (Yes ice is a bit different than snow, but you are also melting from all sides, instead of one, plus this road will have to deal with ice storms, sleet, snow, and rain.)
Hmmm, I wonder how well they plan on anchoring this to the subsurface, it would be bad if a tornado turned the panels into frisbees, something that rarely happens to asphalt or concrete roads. Tornadoes have pulled up manhole covers.
IIRC, about 50 degrees Fahrenheit. They want the surface of the road to be about 34, and car defrosters are up above 80 degrees.
Have you seen a blizzard? (not the DQ treat) Snow can and does fall heavy and fast, plus like I mentioned, it has to deal with sleet and ice storms. Yep it's an extreme, but can the road deal with this?, and again records. I think that Florida is workable, I doubt that Georgetown, CO is though.
BTW did they plan on covering the dirt and gravel roads too?
Yeah, and all you need to do then is make sure you can accurately track every ounce of copper. I mean, it's not like anyone could melt it down or the like, right?
I am not sure about that. I know gold melts pretty easily, but copper...hmm. my knowledge of melting points has eroded since high school.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Solar power can be one of those funny areas where the sandal wearing hippies and gun toting right wingers wind up shopping in the same place and looking at each other funny.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC, about 50 degrees Fahrenheit. They want the surface of the road to be about 34, and car defrosters are up above 80 degrees.
Have you seen a blizzard? (not the DQ treat) Snow can and does fall heavy and fast, plus like I mentioned, it has to deal with sleet and ice storms. Yep it's an extreme, but can the road deal with this?, and again records. I think that Florida is workable, I doubt that Georgetown, CO is though.
BTW did they plan on covering the dirt and gravel roads too?
I live in upstate New York. I have seen systems that can keep porches clear all winter. If you continuously melt the snow as it is falling, you can do it. No one is saying that it would fully replace the need for plowing, but plows get sent out for 2 inches of snow, which this system could easily be designed to handle, way more frequently than you have feet in a day. My guess is you could easily design a system that can handle an inch an hour, which deals with the vast majority of things salt trucks get sent out for. Most areas that get regular, non-lake effect snowfall don't see storms exceeding that more than a few days out of the year. Not to mention this would help eliminate that final layer of snow the plows can't get to.
Sleet and ice storms would be easier than snowfall, as they happen in warmer weather and a mild temperature difference is enough to prevent buildup. These would handle them better than salt, which tends to wash away in the more liquidy partially frozen precipitation.
It's more of an issue that the solar roads need to a) be able to store energy, or b) carry power, in order to melt snow when there isn't any real solar generation (snow generally happens when it's pretty overcast...) and it seems to me that both will be prohibitively expensive and dangerous to boot. I mean... for the insulation on those cables to be known to work, there would have to be some pretty extreme testing done. After the first people responding to an accident get electrocuted by damaged high voltage cables in the road itself, do you think opinion on the solar road might, shall we say, swing a little?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As to the people who argue this would be a bad thing for parking lots because they have too many cars on them during the day:
Have you ever been to a mall during the day? How about a grocery store?
10-4 is dead. During the peak hours for solar activity, you have huge lots that are empty. Those buildings are still using just as much, if not more, energy during them than at other times.
Sure, this may be a bad idea for office buildings, though you could probably still line the traveling parts of the lot with them.
I also really like the idea of parks/basketball courts using these. The small scale stuff is where these are more interesting.
I think these are a terrible idea for most highways. One of the few good points Thunderf00t's video is the power distribution issues that would happen. Far too much of our highway system is designed to not be close to our cities.
It's more of an issue that the solar roads need to a) be able to store energy, or b) carry power, in order to melt snow when there isn't any real solar generation (snow generally happens when it's pretty overcast...) and it seems to me that both will be prohibitively expensive and dangerous to boot. I mean... for the insulation on those cables to be known to work, there would have to be some pretty extreme testing done. After the first people responding to an accident get electrocuted by damaged high voltage cables in the road itself, do you think opinion on the solar road might, shall we say, swing a little?
I live in ny. People are shocked badly by manhole covers semi regularly, and pets are sometimes killed. I have yet to see people demanding an end to electricity.
the small scale stuff is where these are more interesting.
wholehearted agreement
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's more of an issue that the solar roads need to a) be able to store energy, or b) carry power, in order to melt snow when there isn't any real solar generation (snow generally happens when it's pretty overcast...) and it seems to me that both will be prohibitively expensive and dangerous to boot. I mean... for the insulation on those cables to be known to work, there would have to be some pretty extreme testing done. After the first people responding to an accident get electrocuted by damaged high voltage cables in the road itself, do you think opinion on the solar road might, shall we say, swing a little?
We bury high voltage lines under roads all the time. They go through a lot of our sewer systems, which run under a lot of our roads. How is an adjacent trench funneling rainwater significantly different than a sewer line? The fact that this one is designed for to protect the cables as its primary purpose instead of being re-purposed for it decades after the sewer went in makes these safer in my opinion.
Sewer systems are a thing that happens in cities. Speeds in cities tend to be far lower than out on the freeways, no?
Sewer systems are a thing that happens in cities. Speeds in cities tend to be far lower than out on the freeways, no?
Which means the trench gets dug a little deeper and the cables buried a little lower, at most. Besides, this system can detect broken panels, meaning if it is designed properly it can trip a breaker on them and prevent them from having significant current.
Maybe instead of panels, some kind of laminate sheet could be made? Maybe laid in sections large enough that they don't get picked up and turned into death frisbees?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, as I said... it is a massively costly idea. It may indeed be possible to solve each of these problems... but to do so concurrently merely means it becomes too expensive to even imagine.
Let them try. It means little, since they can't do it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm ok with try.
It costs my parents $200 a snowfall to get a plow to clear their driveway, and it may not come by for a few days.
Speaking as someone who used to plow driveways for a (partial) living, they're getting ripped off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It costs my parents $200 a snowfall to get a plow to clear their driveway, and it may not come by for a few days.Speaking as someone who used to plow driveways for a (partial) living, they're getting ripped off.
That depends on how many people are in their area who can plow and how big their driveway is. When you are a few miles down a dirt road that starts in the middle of nowhere, your options get limited.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If they could combine this project with some hover cars, I'd be all about it.
I think that's a stretch goal.
Sewer systems are a thing that happens in cities. Speeds in cities tend to be far lower than out on the freeways, no?Which means the trench gets dug a little deeper and the cables buried a little lower, at most. Besides, this system can detect broken panels, meaning if it is designed properly it can trip a breaker on them and prevent them from having significant current.
Which becomes a problem when the panels are 150 miles away from the nearest settlement... which happens frequently in the U.S. with roads. That's part of why the power grid is so much smaller; it's actually considered impractical on a good day to have a power grid that stretches the entire nation.