Slashdot Mirror


Colorado Prepares To Install 'Smart Road' Product By Integrated Roadways (ieee.org)

Wave723 shares a report from IEEE Spectrum: On August 30, a startup plans to add its "smart pavement" to an intersection in an industrial corner of Denver, Colorado. The company has encased assorted electronics within four slabs of concrete and will wedge those slabs into the road between a Pepsi Co. bottling plant and two parking lots. Integrated Roadways says its product, which can deduce the speed, weight, and direction of a vehicle from the basket of sensors buried in the pavement, will face its first real-world test at that discreet Denver junction. If this trial goes well, the startup "will replace 500 meters of pavement along a dangerous curve in Highway 285, just south of Denver, with its product in early 2019," reports IEEE Spectrum. The sensors will be able to detect when a driver careens off the road's edge and alert authorities. It even has the ability to prompt officials to reconfigure lanes to relieve congestion.

62 comments

  1. too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What good is this for the consumer? When it seems to be a high dollar pork toy for the authorities.

    1. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by javaman235 · · Score: 1

      Given tearing up the road must come with high price, what's wrong with cameras with object tracking or the old tubes they throw across the road today to track speed?

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    2. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given tearing up the road must come with high price, what's wrong with cameras with object tracking or the old tubes they throw across the road today to track speed?

      There are no angel investors involved.

    3. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Colorado mountains. It snows. A lot. IDIOT

    4. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because they were already tearing the road out anyways to widen it.

    5. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Denver is in a valley not the mountains IDIOT. Maybe you should have moved to Colorado for more than just the "wellness centers".

    6. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Denver is in a valley not the mountains IDIOT. Maybe you should have moved to Colorado for more than just the "wellness centers".

      Highway 285, which they talk about in this article, does go into the mountains. Where it snows. Sometimes a lot.

    7. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should have paid attention in 5th grade. Denver is at a high elevation and gets a TON of snow. If you had either ever been to Denver, seen any picture or known anyone there you'd know this.

      If you had ever been to the mountainous area of Colorado, you know the entire nearly 3/4s of the West side of the state. You'd know their roads, from the shitty winters, are crap and in constant need of repair.

    8. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Riceballsan · · Score: 2

      Didn't solar roadway take like 3 million dollars between indie gogo and DoT grants, and all they have to show for it is a small patch of sidewalk with LED lights you can't see during the day, has already caught fire once, and currently is producing under 5 cents worth of power a day in the peak of summer. That's of course before asking what kind of solar pannel surface is supposed to remain good at absorbing light with rocks and sand grinded into them under litteral tons of weight. Solar is great... but a good solar panel and traveling surface do not benefit from the same things. want efficiant solar that matches the legnth of the road... build an overpass.

    9. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the solar sidewalk is also unable to melt snow (advertised feature) and is already having the LEDs die and panels break. Yet some people are still on fire for them as the best "freaking" idea ever.

    10. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The basic concept of solar road surfaces has been proven. There was a trial with a bike path that produces decent amounts of energy, around 70kWh/m2/year in northern Europe.

      Some idiots criticised the cost of the prototype, or pointed out that solar PV on roofs nearby would generate about twice that much. Can you imagine the politics of the local government wanting to use private individual's roofs to generate electricity, or creating shade by erecting panels all over the place? The whole point is that the road is there anyway and accepted as a black stripe through the area, and it gets significant money thrown at it for maintenance anyway.

      In China there is a 1.2 mile test section on a major highway that uses transparent concrete. Seems to be working reasonably well so far. It's that kind of innovate to get costs down and increase durability that will be needed to make solar road surfaces economically viable.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      The point in comparing them to roof designs isn't in saying that you should put them on private roofs, the point is you can put them anywhere that allows you the benefits of being on a roof. There's more or less 3 ways you can set up a solar panel. The most efficient is tracking, where the panel is smart and tilts itself to face the sun. Next best is to angle it and face the most common directions the sun will face, and of course the worse idea is to just leave it flat on the ground. The china roadway has pretty much been failing miserably, the government is mostly blaming theft of solar panels (another reason why it isn't so viable), but many engineers are still saying the same thing... between the hit of being flat on the ground, having the extra layers of protection, and of course traffic blocking the sun, it isn't breaking even anyway. Anyway as you were comparing it to rooftops because putting the burden on private proporty is bad... what's being completely ignored is best of both worlds options, like what Korea did https://inhabitat.com/could-th... Where you get panels, the option to angle them as needed, you don't have the added challenges of needing needing to withstand rocks/sand attached to multi ton moving objects, and it even adds extra benefits of shielding the bike path from weather.

    12. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      How did people steal solar panels that were buried under a transparent concrete road surface on a busy highway? And what would they do with them, it's not like they are the kind of panel you could just throw on a roof?

      The point is that in most countries the local government can't just build stuff wherever it suits them. There are all sorts of considerations, practical and aesthetic and legal. So once they put solar on the roof of their offices etc. and the price comes down with development and mass production the very large surface area of roads makes them attractive.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by ezelkow1 · · Score: 1

      ummm, not really. I live in Denver, we dont really get all that much snow, at least nothing that sticks around and is annoying. The east coast and midwest (like chicago area) are much much worse. We may get a couple ~6in snow storms each winter but due to the elevation and fairly consistent sunlight its usually mostly melted away within a couple of days. Last winter we only really had one such storm that I can remember, and usually its like an inch or two thats gone by noon the next day.

      The actual mountain areas are completely different, they will have consistent weekly snow, but the denver area is a completely different beast from the areas 30-60min away

    14. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      hell if I know, but apparently there are conflicting stories, some say it is theft http://www.latimes.com/world/a...

      yet others say it probably was just damaged by normal physics... AKA solar panels and heavy things don't mix so well. https://www.scmp.com/news/chin...

    15. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The LA Times is geoblocked but from the other link I agree it does tend to look like normal road damage. China doesn't have the kind of strict requirements for vehicles that we have in the West, so you see some pretty dodgy looking trucks with precarious loads. People are careful not to follow too closely behind them.

      So yeah, normal for China.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    16. Re: too much smart not enough common sense by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      right but the general point that's for just a few days. American automotive standards aren't magically going to make tanker trucks with rocks, dirt, sand etc... stuck in the tires, and solar panels a good mix. Trying to combine the 2 in the same way is like trying to combine pizza delivery and plumbing into the same business. They may have occasional need to go to your house in common, but that is where the similarities end and the contradictions become quite apparant.

  2. Wouldn't it be better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to fix the road so you can't careen off of it?

    what, are they high?

    1. Re:Wouldn't it be better by Gherald · · Score: 1

      "Amy Ford, director of communications for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), says that section of highway cannot easily be widened and is too narrow to support the addition of a guardrail. When accidents do occur there, it’s crucial to alert emergency responders as quickly as possible."

    2. Re:Wouldn't it be better by alzoron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In the article the careening thing is mentioned in regards to Colorado's mountainous highways. So yeah, they are high. The roads are very high and very difficult to make careen-off proof.

    3. Re:Wouldn't it be better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's this thing called "banking," they should look into it. Also, "speed limits."

    4. Re: Wouldn't it be better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah

      YEAH

      BANKING

      Nobody ever thought about putting a bank on the side of a mountain before. Or, maybe they did, and then realized that because it is a FUCKING MOUNTAIN, there is nowhere to brace the upper part of the bank against centrifugal force.

      You simpering fool.

    5. Re:Wouldn't it be better by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Banking sounds awesome right up until you have to plow snow....

      Instead of banking try on this new concept for size - "Drive at a reasonable speed for conditions and road".

      What Colorado DOES put in are guardrails, which provide harsh but fair feedback when you have exceeded the margins, and are just low enough that if you really exceed them you are properly disposed of.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:Wouldn't it be better by gravewax · · Score: 1

      yet they have no problems spending millions on electronics to tell them this? wouldn't fixed cameras combined with better guard rails be a far better and cheaper investment and provide the same information to authorities? Add some speed cameras to it and they may even pay for themselves.

    7. Re:Wouldn't it be better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      smells like bullshit to justify stupid expense.

  3. Just a bit of clarity here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll submit that particular bit of "Dangerous" Hwy 285 is no more dangerous, curved, slippery, narrow, scary, icy, snowy, than it was when that highway was first built. All that has changed is that drivers have become breathtakingly incompetent, concerned more with not missing that latest tweet or fabulous addition to their wall, or settling in to a nice relaxing phone call. In a vehicle with enough technology its manufacturer implies in advertisements all one has to do is smash the gas or smash the brakes and all will be just dandy because cameras. This is just more of America's addiction to a nineteenth century technology, and various business models that rely on the easy scrape of taxpayers' income to make their own fortunes.

    BTW, the view of South Park from the top of Kenosha Pass is glorious. But if you get stuck behind a UPS box truck or some mountain-living-dream idiot it's not a quick drive up from Denver. It's a nice route to Santa Fe too, but nowhere near as nice Walsenburg/Ft. Garland, over La Veta Pass, but much nicer than the mind-crushing I-25-all-the-way. Welcome to Colorado! Don't forget to leave when it stops being cool to be here (and it will).

    1. Re:Just a bit of clarity here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To add to this: the drivers on 285 are incredibly dangerous. Avoid it if possible. That road is a death trap. And the worst part: the bad drivers are actually the locals, who are obnoxious and impatient and think they are invincible because they've driven the road more than twice.

      Beautiful countryside and mountains, ruined by humans.

    2. Re: Just a bit of clarity here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the humans weren't there then whats the point of those mountains

    3. Re: Just a bit of clarity here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For humans duh!

  4. Seems useful... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I have to agree I see some value in some sections of roads where more accidents occur being able to alert authorities there's a problem - that could save response time.

      I wonder how much quicker it would really be, since mostly people would dial 911 right away - but it would probably shorten the time it took to know exactly where an accident was.

    I've driven on the part of 285 mentioned pretty often, what would really be better is if they widened lanes a bit more at each curve. That section has kind of tight road spacing and a few extra feet per lane would probably help avoid a lot of simple accidents.

    I've also noticed that particular part of the road has a real drop in cell quality, and wonder if cell signals dropping out on a fairly curvy road does not somehow play into more accidents.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  5. True innovation by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    If you want to make a true road innovation, do it without concrete. We are running out of sand to make the material (desert sand is unusable unfortunately), and it does not ages very well beyond 50 years.

    1. Re:True innovation by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind: All of our modern problems can be solved or significantly mitigated by mandatory population reduction...including this one.

    2. Re:True innovation by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      A reduced population will still have to deal with concrete old bridges that collapse.

    3. Re:True innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      25 REM WHOOSH
      30 GOTO $PARENT_POST
      40 REM apparently /. hates all caps and cries a lot when used

    4. Re:True innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which will then further reduce the population. Problem solved!

    5. Re: True innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would only be efficient if you had some form of competition or test to reintroduce a survival of the fittest strat. No point in eliminating people for no reason

    6. Re:True innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought cement for concrete comes from limestone and silicon for electronics comes from fancy high-quality sand.

    7. Re:True innovation by hawk · · Score: 1

      That problem curve is apparently already implementing this solution . . . :)

      hawk

  6. South? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never though of 285 as south of Denver. More southwest. Mountains make a difference.

  7. boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I welcome our new "rat road" overlords.

    1. Re: boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, is there a way to opt out?

      Are these roads paid for by citizens...to tattle on citizens?

  8. Taxation.. by thesupraman · · Score: 1

    The 'benefit' to this is almost certainly that it will ALSO be collecting identifying information about the vehicles and occupants.

    A lot of local and state governments are rushing to put technology around roads that allows personal tracking, by monitoring wifi, bluetooth and other similar emissions, and of course once they have enough of this, automated tolling, congestion charges, speeding and other driving fines, etc become SO much easier to levy 'for the good of everyone' (which generally means so the state can spend more and more on pet projects).

    This is almost certainly the aim of this project citizen, please comply and be happy, or else.

    1. Re:Taxation.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you are in public, people can see you. Including the authorities.

      When you are on the road, you pose a life-and-limb threat to everyone else who is on the road.

      There *is* something to be said for the safety benefits of getting speeders and light-runners off the road (or at least motivating them to behave better when on the road), since they put the rest of us at risk.

      The widespread cultural disregard for traffic law does not entitle people to continue breaking it.

      On the other hand...those traffic cams provide NO grace period. That is patently ridiculous. This enforcement is being done unreasonably in order to make money. This makes people who would otherwise approve of them, hate them and politically resist them.

      Assholes on the road, assholes enforcing the law. Assholes all around, shitting all over everything.

    2. Re:Taxation.. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      When you are in public, yes, people see you. But they don't normally TRACK you. People don't generally like having neighbors that peek through the blinds and keep lists of comings and goings.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  9. Probably for people careening of a plot of road... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you serious? It's a speed trap

    Cue the shock and disbelief when this is used for evil instead of good.

  10. Dangerous curve by PPH · · Score: 1

    I can just imagine them getting some strange data.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  11. LOL, mail in ticket by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    They are touting this as "for safety" I'll bet. But, once they work out the bugs, look for mandated NFC, bluetooth or some other ID device on EVERY vehicle. If it can detect the vehicle speed, just think of the unlimited revenue stream for speeding vehicles. Or, detecting if a vehicle license plate/registration/driver license is expired. Oh just think of the possibilities. Sniffers to detect pollution, someone talking on the phone, eating a hamburger, all sorts of thinks government could use to bilk consumers out of...of course, all in the name of "safety". Crock of mule fritters!

    1. Re:LOL, mail in ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Colorado:

      Given how many vehicles have ezpass they could easily already be doing this with that system. They use it for the signs that say "Colfax 8min" so are already using it to track speeds or at least timing specific vehicles passing specific locations.

      There are sniffers they park on busier roads that can allow you to skip a test because your care read clean X number of times. Those obviously run plate readers to exempt you, not an enforcement mechanism other than potentially bumping your check up 1 year (is bi-annual regularly) if you keep failing.

      It doesn't seem to be a priority luckily and there is still the problem of recording the driver not just the vehicle. So far, even though they can they don't seem willing to.

    2. Re:LOL, mail in ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know a problem that will need an advisement startup in about 20 years: How do you fund local government when autonomous vehicles no longer commit traffic violations?

  12. Is this the birth of "Internet of Roads"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Dream: Roads connected to the Internet, or "IoR", will revolutionize road safety! Reality: Roads will get hacked and send out bad information to Internet-connected vehicles.

  13. Has been discreet, but moving on up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I drive past this bottling plant every day, as do many other people as it's between the highway (well, two highways actually) and a large part of residential inner city.

    It's historically been an isolated and industrial part of Denver, but there's a huge revitalization effort going on there. If you look on that Google map you'll see more than just car parks and industrial lots. There's a Natural Grocers just a block down and within half a mile there are three craft breweries, including the newish Blue Moon craft brewery (not to be confused with the horrible licensed Coors product).

    Here's an article on what's happening to the street it's on:
    https://www.denverpost.com/2018/06/21/denver-brighton-boulevard-project-impact/

    1. Re:Has been discreet, but moving on up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the day, Pepsi sold franchises to people for bottling plants for their soda. The plant mentioned (on 38th St., a bit off Brighton Blvd. if I recall) was one of those. At some point Pepsi decided to buy back all those franchises to control quality, etc. and that plant in Denver was the last hold-out. Owner eventually struck a deal with Pepsi Co. for a price that was, apparently, enormous. Probably a run-up to the Soda Wars.

  14. How long before it's on fire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully it works out better than this enhanced pavement:

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/29/first-solar-freakin-roadway-in-the-us-breaks-again/

  15. Old tech by gordguide · · Score: 1

    A local firm, International Road Dynamics, has been manufacturing and selling a product that does exactly the same things as this product does, for 35 years.

    https://www.irdinc.com/

    1. Re:Old tech by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      But see... this one will be smart and have apps and disrupt the paradigm....

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  16. Or they could by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    spend the money on old fashion maintenance and building additional lanes to reduce congestion. But that is so old school. Must spend on new and shiny stuff. My town just spent a but-load on some new autonomous sensor for testing the one autonomous car they are testing. Meanwhile us meat slabs still get RYG lights with no timing info at all. If there is a walk sign that has the timing info, I can get an idea if I should speed up, hold speed or come off the accelerator based on the pedestrian signa. Funny no one ever seems to suggest the millions of cars with meat slabs driving might find timing info for them useful.

  17. Will they use this to dectect people speeding? by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

    How will they use the data when they find that 95% of traffic on a given road segment exceeds the speed limit? Will they use it for revenue enhancement? Or will they use it to implement the 85% rule?

  18. well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now we know where all that money made from taxing and regulating legal weed is going...and who's smoking much of it.

  19. A Horse walks into a bar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a lump of asphalt strapped to it's back.

    Horse says: Bartender, one beer for me and one for the road.

  20. Re:Probably for people careening of a plot of road by fedos · · Score: 1

    TIL making roads safer by reducing speeds is evil.