Slashdot Mirror


Solar Tree Bears Fruit

Hugh Pickens writes "A prototype solar tree that recently went on display on a busy street in Vienna, Austria has passed a key test by providing light during the night-time even when the sun had been blocked by clouds for four days in a row. The branches of the solar tree were decorated with 10 solar lamps, each one powered by 36 solar cells. The tree included rechargeable batteries and electronic systems to measure the amount of light in the atmosphere and trigger the solar lamps to go on. 'Not just trees but other objects could be decorated with solar cells and so keep streets well lit at night time,' said Christina Werner from Cultural Project Management. Google uses a similar concept to light their parking lots with 3,000 solar panels that provide up to 10 percent of the Googleplex's power demand. We discussed Google's solar initiative last year."

17 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. The question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How much non-renewable energy does it take to produce each solar tree?

    1. Re:The question is... by Adambomb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What i'd want to know is how many existing street lamps could just have struts affixed to the sides to allow more attachment points for the PV cells and lighting on their own? Why does it have to be a single new unit to begin with.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    2. Re:The question is... by NorbrookC · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How much non-renewable energy does it take to produce each solar tree

      If that were the only energy concern, then you'd have a point. It probably does take more energy in the beginning to produce it. However, the better (and more relevant) measure is total energy consumpption over its lifespan. That is, compare the manufacturing energy + energy use from grid + maintenance (replacement bulbs, etc.) over its projected lifepan to a standard lighting system. If it turns out that the overall energy used is less than that of a standard one, you come out ahead. You could also do cost analysis, but any pilot system has a much higher cost than production systems.

    3. Re:The question is... by jacquesm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you should also factor in the disposal costs of the batteries, that probably is the largest factor.

    4. Re:The question is... by MindStalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You also need to factor in the public safety benefit of it working even if the electricity is out. A whole city that stays lit up during a disaster could be very beneficial.

    5. Re:The question is... by StopKoolaidPoliticsT · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We (the continental US, but this applies to most places on Earth) receive 5.5 useful sunlight hours per day, on average. On average, maybe, but it doesn't make NY or Washington get as much sun as Texas. You'll get a better ROI the farther south you live and the less cloudy the atmosphere is.

      Modern solar panels have an effective lifespan of at least 20 years. Is that taking into account hail storms and other forms of damage that happen in non-ideal conditions? I've seen hail leave dents in cars, I'd imagine that would be pretty devastating to a solar panel array. I'd imagine they'd also be pretty useless when they're covered with snow during the winter.

      The cheapest commercially-manufactured home solar panels currently cost $3 per Watt. Is that just the panel cost? If so, that doesn't include power inverters, batteries to store the power (I use most of my power at night when I'm home, not during the day when the panels are producing energy), replacement and disposal of the batteries, maintenance of the system, replacement of damaged panels, etc. All of that will need to be factored into the cost per watt too.
      --
      Stop Koolaid Politics
    6. Re:The question is... by Telvin_3d · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, the point of the article is that these things are working after 4 days in a row with almost no sunlight. Sounds reasonably robust to me.

    7. Re:The question is... by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I haven't seen "real" (ie, damage-causing) hail since 1980 or 1981, and when it does happen, it tends to happen over a small area. I'd call that a low enough probability event to ignore. As for the more general "accidental damage" category - Well, does your house have windows? Do you need to replace them all every few years due to baseballs or hail or meteorite damage?

      Didn't anyone see that indestructible monitor a few days ago with the crystal screen? Okay, it's not actually indestructible but it's a transparent material that is strong enough to resist hammers, nails and cheap crossbow bolts whilst being cheap enough to use as the front for a monitor. The technology to make tough solar panels probably exists.

      So we might be down one more argument against solar panels and we already have some good arguments for them - the fact that Earth will run out of fossil fuels and the general consensus that existing energy production methods are destroying our environment.
      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  2. Solar Electric Baobab Tree by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With a few minor changes, this "tree" could collect the rain water that runs off the solar panel and store it in its "trunk." Then, it would slowly release the water during the night to water the plants around the base of the tree. The result would save water and create a literally greener environment.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Solar Electric Baobab Tree by coldcell · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Soviet Russia the trees pee on you!

      --
      Launchy.net changed my world.
    2. Re:Solar Electric Baobab Tree by turgid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Firstly, the water that reaches the soil when it's raining mostly flows over the surface and into drains. If it were stored and released slowly, it would be more effective at watering the plants since it would have time to penetrate the surface. Also, being released at night it would not be subject to evapouration caused by sunlight.

      I also imagine that these solar trees will function in all countries, not just Austria, or those in Western Europe.

  3. s/Austia/Austria/g by Gothmolly · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe Vienna is in AUSTRIA.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  4. Looks promising by dysfunct · · Score: 2, Interesting
    A better picture of that tree can be found here.

    As a citizen of Austria, I find it quite astonishing that this thing was able to provide light for a couple of days, although I have to admit that compared to now October still had plenty of daylight. I don't know whether or not they have been removed from the streets, but it would be pretty interesting to see for how long they can go in December/January, when it's quite dark throughout the entire month.

    Apart from the energy savings, though, I wouldn't necessarily want to see them implemented throughout the city. Most of the 1st district's lighting is quite dim, giving the whole city with its many historic buildings a bit of a romantic flair, which - in my opinion - would be lost with all those bright lights everywhere.

    --
    :/- spoon(_).
  5. Very inefficient compared to grid-tied panels by originalhack · · Score: 3, Informative

    So long as fossil fuels are being burned to make power during the day, it is far more efficient to take the daytime output of the most cost-effective possible panels (usually nice unimaginative rectangular ones that mount on existing roofs or new carport structures) and feed it directly to the grid to reduce the load on the inefficient plants that peak during the daytime. There is no reason to lose a major chunk of the power charging batteries, to build expensive battery arrays or to build bizarre structures to support the cells.

    At night, the worst power plants are throttled back or shut down and the most efficient plants are handling the load.

    When no further fossil fuels are used to make daytime power, then storing electricity from daylight becomes interesting and, even then, batteries are a loser.

  6. Re:good idea but... by blackest_k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Its not too bad not suitable for every street admittedly.

      its look is like an anemone quite alien an almost Martian chronicles feel to it. googles bus shelter designs are not as interesting to look at.

    cost to make them may be quite high, however with 10% of European electricity production going into street lighting in europe the potential reduction in carbon emissions is significant.

      Retro fitting just the LED lamps to existing street lighting could be power saving in itself. The solar panels wouldn't need to provide power year round since existing lamps have a power supply they could switch too.

    I'm sure more sympathetic designs could be made, its the potential of this project which makes it interesting.

    The real questions are how much power is required and how much light do these tree's produce.

  7. Lighting Parking Lots??? by Wugger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why bother going to the trouble of milking high quality renewable energy from the environment if you're just going to waste it on something frivolous like keeping an empty expanse of pavement lit up for eight hours a day!? If we stopped frittering away energy on pointless things like lighting empty parking lots, we'd have a lot less to worry about in terms of energy security. Even the big G doesn't get it.

    1. Re:Lighting Parking Lots??? by Socguy · · Score: 2

      The reason empty parking lots are lit at night is for liability reasons. Car accidents, muggings and rapes are some examples of such liabilities. Crime prevention is another one. Car break-ins and things like house intrusions are all easier to accomplish in the dark. Lighting the city at night is seen by governments as due diligence, much like scraping snow off the sidewalks, and sanding icy intersections.