France To Pave 1000km of Road With Solar Panels (solarcrunch.org)

An anonymous reader writes: France is planning on a project to build 1000 kilometers of road with specially designed solar panels. This project will supply 5 million people in France with electricity if it is successful. Though many solar experts are skeptical of this project, the French government has given the go-ahead to this venture. According to France's minister of ecology and energy, Ségolène Royal, the tender for this project is already issued under the "Positive Energy" initiative and the test for the solar panels will begin by this spring.The photo voltaic solar panels called "Wattway" which will be used in the project are jointly developed by the French infrastructure firm "Colas" and the National Institute for Solar Energy. The specialty of "Wattway" is that its very sturdy and can let heavy trucks pass over it, also offering a good grip to avoid an accident. Interestingly, this project will not remove road surfaces but instead, the solar panels will be glued to the existing pavement.

Comments

What could go wrong

[kamapuaa]

So basically the plan is to cover the pavement with glass, that will need to stay clean to let the sunlight through. I see no possible problem with any of this.

Re:What could go wrong

[ShanghaiBill]

The vehicle-covered to not covered duty cycle on a rural highway is pretty high.

The duty cycle on rooftops is a lot better, plus there are no trucks driving over them there. I could see looking for alternatives once all the rooftops are full, but they are less than 1% covered so far. Ségolène Royal has a long history of advocating crazy policies with little thought about how to pay for them.

Re:What could go wrong

[currently_awake]

On most highways the cars only cover about 20% of the pavement. Unfortunately that's as good as this idea gets. It only makes sense to put solar panels where the cost of the panel is less than the value of the electricity, and roads isn't one of those places (armoured glass is expensive, they get scratched and dirty). Better places: a roof over the road (massive reduction in snow/ice removal costs, you can use cheap solar panels), on house roofs (you can use cheap solar panels), deserts (cheap land, lots of sun, cheap panels).

Re:What could go wrong

[vel-ex-tech]

But why roads? Of all the places we could put solar panels, why roads? I mean, I just can't comprehend how this is even a proposal in the first place. I haven't been able to since the first time I heard about the idea, and I still can't. There are too many things that can go wrong, too much engineering involved. It's like a Rube Goldberg machine. The solar panels are better on my roof and in my backyard. If we want solar power from roads, then why not just mount the panels on poles along the roadway?

Re: What could go wrong

[orlanz]

We could put it on all downhills in a certain grade range. Steal power from the brakes.

Also local roads with traffic that burn gas inefficiently should be ok too. They don't run the engine efficiently so stealing some excess power should be ok.

Re:What could go wrong

[geoskd]

The duty cycle on rooftops is a lot better

True but with rooftop, you pretty much need one inverter per rooftop, which adds substantial amounts to the cost. With these paved roadways, you could probably get the equivalent of 10-20 rooftops with only one inverter, thus significantly reducing the cost of installation. Plus, under most circumstances, installers wont fall off the roadway, thus creating a *very* expensive insurance liability. The cost of liability insurance is a very large (~20%) part of the cost a given rooftop solar installation. Playing around on roofs tends to kill and maim people with rather frightening frequency.

Re:What could go wrong

[Narcocide]

No, more likely they're doing this because nobody wanted to give up any of their private land on the sides of the roads, so using the road itself for solar paneling is an infinitely more efficient use of space, because the roads themselves are public land by definition, and paving them with solar panels takes up exactly 0 extra real estate.

tl;dr

[Anonymous Coward]

RRV #632 for the tech. For the political sorts, this is what happens when you have a stupid EU policy requiring the state to pay private companies to build infrastructure rather than employing their own talent.

Re:tl;dr

[Barny]

Heh, I came here to post exactly this. Dave tends to only call bullshit on things that merit it, and as an electronics engineer this is his bread and butter.

Why not a roof?

[JoeMerchant]

Wouldn't it be more effective to build a "solar roof" over the highway, shading motorists during the hottest parts of the day, angling the panels to maximize insolation at the latitude, and for f's sake: not having to make them sturdy enough and grippy enough to safely drive trucks on them?

How long will this roadway last, and what will be the replacement cost? I mean, if this miracle surface can stop potholes from forming, then, yeah, let's put it everywhere, but I'm not feeling like that is the case.

Why?

[Dereck1701]

I can't really see the reasoning behind this, it would be far easier, more efficient, quicker and cost effective to put panels along the roadsides, next to substations on the sides of buildings, on roofs, or practically anywhere but on roads. Until they can lay solar panels like they do pavement for virtually the same cost as pavement there really isn't much point when there are SOOOOOOO many other viable locations.

Thanks France

[Kohath]

I don't think this will work, but I hope it does. I'm glad the French are paying to find out instead of us.

I suspect the initial cost (or yearly amortization of that cost) and ongoing maintenance of the solar panels will be higher than the value of the generated power.

1000km?

[Dutch Gun]

Wow... 1000km is a pretty hefty pilot program. And here's the important phrase:

This project will supply 5 million people in France with electricity if it is successful

So... 1000km and they have no idea if it's going to be successful? It seems like the reasonable thing to do would be to pave a few km of road and see how it holds up under real conditions for a few years. But hey, money is no object when you're saving the planet, right? Well, I'm glad it's their tax dollars that are doing a giant feasibility study for the rest of us.

The Dutch have the right idea. They've started with a 100m strip to start with to see if the things actually work as intended first. I like the concept, but new products and concepts like this need to be tested pretty carefully.

Good Video Outlining Technical Challenges

[Kunedog]

There was a successful kickstarter for something similar, which IMO gets ripped to shreds in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If you love solar panels, then why not put them, well, anywhere else instead of on a road surface where they will be under constant, severe assault by heavy vehicles with tires that can leave light-blocking rubber on them.

Doing this would be expensive and ineffective, if not impossible. It seems good for nothing but a scam to bilk investors or as another vacuous Green PR campaign.

Re:Good Video Outlining Technical Challenges

[Mr D from 63]

The one thing that is clearly missing from the article and reference pieces is an estimation of cost. There is no indication that this will be cost effective in any way. It would likely be much less costly to line roadsides and medians with normal panels.

But alas, for some, cost doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if we maximize the carbon reduction returns for our investments, it is more important to look like you are doing something extraordinary. Look at how wonderful the French are!

Slashdot: News for Haters

[Idou]

Seriously, of all the things to be bitching about in the world, this project seems like it should be low on the list, yet /.ers are foaming at the mouths by the look of the top comments right now. Even if this project is destined to failure, do you actually believe humanity will never, ever be able to capture solar energy from roads? Well, if you admit it might be possible one day, then guess what? It is going to take projects like this one failing to eventually get there (or did you think technological progress hatches like a magic egg if you wait long enough?).

A project like this is NOTHING compared to the money spent on fusion so far. Is it actually any more of a long shot than fusion? Seems like people who have trouble prioritizing their bitching list should not be so critical of how others are prioritizing their long shot energy projects. Besides, this has nothing to do with the project, and you are just blowing off steam because it is Sunday, and you couldn't get a date on Saturday night, AGAIN, right?

If only people could get rich off of pissing all over someone else's idea. . . /.ers could finally move out of their parents' basements and stop being such bitter a-holes. . .

Why roads?

[Firethorn]

Okay, first up: I analyzed the 'Solar Freaking Roadways!!!' proposals so I know the arguments, though I think they glossed over or ignored numerous problems. My end thought was that it might be a neat system for a pedestrian walk area, where you don't have anything bigger than a golf cart traversing it.

That being said, I'm always willing to be proven wrong - it's relatively easy to get me to agree to a 100m/1km/1 Mile or so 'test strip'. 100m, for example, is long enough to get a truck completely onto the solar surface and drive for a bit - because the interface might be a destruction point. Something to study, obviously.

Okay, the reasoning for 'solar roads' is a combination of displacement and synchronicity. By displacement, we mean that the surface of a properly constructed solar panel displaces other construction material - pavement, for a road. For something like a 'solar car park', solar panels are strong enough to replace the roof, not supplement it.
- Problem: Pavement is relatively incredibly cheap and durable.
Synchronicity: By this I mean that the substitution provides additional benefits. Solar roadways, for example, boasts that you could incorporate heating elements into their units such that when it snows you can avoid the need for plowing by melting the snow off the roads, then recoup the heat used via the solar panels. Problem - I don't think they've thought about heavy snows and that you get less light in winter.
Another 'benefit' would be using LED lighting to enable 'remapping' the control lanes on a road, signaling when it's safe to pass, etc...
They even said that the solar roads would be easier to repair - have a busted hexagonal panel? Pull up with a truck that has a robot arm that automatically unbolts and lifts the damaged panel and locks a replacement in. Each panel is supposed to be cheap because it's made in an automated factory.

As such, using the panels as 'roadway shade/shelter' such that things like rain and snow don't reach the road at all, and probably even block direct sun, is a much better use.