Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Solar Road Thread (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Tue 01 Sep 2009, 14:49:02

pstarr wrote:Let try the math again.
assume:
$1,000/pv killowatt
10 sq. ft/pv killowatt
Whoa, whoa, whoa playa! Yer math can't ignore tha real world. IRL panels are 60+ square feet per kW!
pstarr wrote:somebody help with the batteries? Got to have them (and associated extra panels) for the other 20 hours the sun is not at zenith.

Okay. I'll give it a try.
assume:
750 amps/100 volt motor
7,500amps/10 cars
150,000 Ah/day (7,500 amp*20 hours)

need average road density etc. Right?
The batteries are in the car playa, and the panels are already there!

P.S. 750 amps/100 volts is 75,000amp! ;)
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby Kez » Tue 01 Sep 2009, 22:55:31

fletch_961 wrote:
yesplease wrote:All of that is already addressed in the site's FAQ or in a paper I linked earlier. The properties of glass don't seem to be the issue. The application seems to be where the idea will make it or break it since that is pretty new territory.


While I don't doubt the possibility of making a glass material that can fit the bill for road worthiness, the question is why bother? And at what cost?

Asphalt is made from local aggregate quarried from a gravel pit. This glass material will have to be engineered to exacting specifications. Any old sand won't do.

If they can make solar panels that can withstand 80k pounds of pressure with 15% efficiency that are 12 x 12 ft all for the low price of $7k then why don't me and you just slap them up on our roofs. That way we don't have to worry about Pstarr's Gremlin X breaking down on the freeway and causing a traffic jam that blocks the Sun from our power supply just as we are about to read one of his awe inspiring posts.


Exactly. No doubt some glass can be made to accomplish such things, but at what cost? If one breaks, does power to everything stop since they will all be connected?
Kez
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri 06 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: North Texas

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Wed 02 Sep 2009, 01:15:09

The paper I linked on page 2 pegs the cost of frit as comparable to the cost of asphalt, provided oil doesn't drop back down to $30/bbl of course. Power is only cut if it's night time, the break happens on a dead end road, and we're beyond whatever emergency power the cap bank can provide. Generally speaking, the application of the glass is what makes it or breaks it. Being able to put solar panels and whatnot underneath is just a positive benefit of using something that can be transparent, and it can avoid some aspects of the land use requirements of renewistan, although renewistan is arguably a bit much in terms of energy requirements.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby fletch_961 » Wed 02 Sep 2009, 02:02:57

You need a link w/ the cost of the glass equivalent to determine whether or not it's worthwhile.


I thought you posted one on page two of this thread. Of course that link claimed that asphalt sells for $375 / ton.

Asphalt (en-us-asphalt.ogg ˈæs.fɒlt (help·info)) is a sticky, black and highly viscous liquid or semi-solid that is present in most crude petroleums and in some natural deposits sometimes termed asphaltum.

Asphalt concrete, normally known simply as asphalt or AC (in North America), is a composite material commonly used for construction of pavement, highways and parking lots.


Maybe that is where your confusion is coming from.

Asphalt concrete, the stuff we pave with, sells for ~$60 a ton delivered. Now what was glass frit selling for? Delivered? To specs? Self-cleaning? How much is it going to cost to heat it to 1300 degrees C once it is delivered? What special equipment is going to be needed to work with something that hot? Do we have to melt it (1300 degrees C) to get "easier access" to power/data equipment and solar panels for repair work? Do the solar panels have to built to sustain 80k pound loads or do have to make support structures to channel the load over and around the panels? Now, lets toss in $12 M per 4 lane-mile for solar panels, a couple mill for interconnections, staff salaries to monitor the system plus a crew to clean the glass whenever there is a long period without rain.

I'm thinking Joe at Penn State (who wrote that paper) has never done any road work.
User avatar
fletch_961
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Wed 02 Sep 2009, 15:13:37

fletch_961 wrote:
You need a link w/ the cost of the glass equivalent to determine whether or not it's worthwhile.


I thought you posted one on page two of this thread. Of course that link claimed that asphalt sells for $375 / ton.

Asphalt (en-us-asphalt.ogg ˈæs.fɒlt (help·info)) is a sticky, black and highly viscous liquid or semi-solid that is present in most crude petroleums and in some natural deposits sometimes termed asphaltum.

Asphalt concrete, normally known simply as asphalt or AC (in North America), is a composite material commonly used for construction of pavement, highways and parking lots.


Maybe that is where your confusion is coming from.

Asphalt concrete, the stuff we pave with, sells for ~$60 a ton delivered.
My confusion? I'm not the one comparing a known to an unknown and claiming one is cheaper than the other.
fletch_961 wrote:Now what was glass frit selling for? Delivered? To specs? Self-cleaning?
That's just the problem with a comparison, no one knows yet.
fletch_961 wrote:How much is it going to cost to heat it to 1300 degrees C once it is delivered? What special equipment is going to be needed to work with something that hot? Do we have to melt it (1300 degrees C) to get "easier access" to power/data equipment and solar panels for repair work?
The point of the project is that it won't need to be heated to extremely high temps. Same reason why there's interest in something similar w/ asphalt.
fletch_961 wrote:Do the solar panels have to built to sustain 80k pound loads or do have to make support structures to channel the load over and around the panels?
The road appears to be the support structure.
fletch_961 wrote:Now, lets toss in $12 M per 4 lane-mile for solar panels, a couple mill for interconnections, staff salaries to monitor the system plus a crew to clean the glass whenever there is a long period without rain.
Don't forget the half a million per year from the electricity the panels produce at the average U.S. price, probably more (closer to a million per year) since we're looking at peak power (more expensive) not baseload power, the reduction in service crews needed for electrical work and road work, as well as much less labor intensive repaving. Electric/data line costs will be the same or less, just w/ few needs for servicing. The cap bank allows for load leveling, which is another potential cost reduction. And probably a couple more I'm not thinking of right now.
fletch_961 wrote:I'm thinking Joe at Penn State (who wrote that paper) has never done any road work.
It could be, but that doesn't mean you can claim it's more expensive w/o concrete data on it. ;)
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby fletch_961 » Wed 02 Sep 2009, 16:52:09

The point of the project is that it won't need to be heated to extremely high temps.


How?
My confusion? I'm not the one comparing a known to an unknown and claiming one is cheaper than the other.

The paper I linked on page 2 pegs the cost of frit as comparable to the cost of asphalt, provided oil doesn't drop back down to $30/bbl of course.

You are right. You are claiming they are comparable in price.
Plain Jane glass frit is more expensive than hot mixed asphalt. Common sense tells me that glass frit made to the required specs will be leagues more expensive. Not to mention the equipment needed to install it and the specially trained crew to work it. Asphalt is hot. It burns. Molten glass will burn through you. Do you even know what glass frit is?
The road appears to be the support structure.

So add many millions for concrete footings and steel framing? Or does the glass magically support the load over the panels?
the reduction in service crews needed for electrical work and road work

Based on?
as well as much less labor intensive repaving.

Based on?
The cap bank allows for load leveling, which is another potential cost reduction.

Or a potential cost increase. What is the cost of these capacitors? Why are wind mill farms not using them now?
Same reason why there's interest in something similar w/ asphalt.

I'm pretty sure the "something similar w/ asphalt" doesn't include asphalt being a support structure over solar panels. I'll bet the idea is more along the lines of using on site RAP, some additional asphalt cement, and a microwave to reheat it on site so that it can be used immediately to re-pave the road bed. Read about the concept a decade ago. Have not heard or seen it practice yet. Now can glass frit be heated and cool without crystallization taking effect on site?
Maybe were not wearing the same colour glasses. Right now I'm picturing a glass bridge supporting the traffic load over a bunch of solar panels,data/power lines, and maybe even the city sewer mains. How are you picturing this?
Don't forget the half a million per year from the electricity the panels produce at the average U.S. price, probably more (closer to a million per year) since we're looking at peak power (more expensive) not baseload power

A million dollars revenue per year will barely cover the capital costs to the owners of these panels. Who foots the bill to be the owners of these? The taxpayers?
User avatar
fletch_961
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Thu 03 Sep 2009, 01:35:12

fletch_961 wrote:How?

fletch_961 wrote:Based on?

fletch_961 wrote:Based on?

The document I linked on page two mentions the pertinent info IIRC. There's also another one out there w/ the same basic gist.
fletch_961 wrote:You are right. You are claiming they are comparable in price.
Plain Jane glass frit is more expensive than hot mixed asphalt.
I didn't mention HMA/AC, just asphalt. The difference in longevity means that the binder, ie asphalt, would be about half (15% binder 85% aggregate, three applications) of the current ~$600+/ton price alone, not to mention the cost of the aggregate.
fletch_961 wrote:Common sense tells me that glass frit made to the required specs will be leagues more expensive.
Sooner or later, asphalt costs will rise to meet glass costs, if they can pull off the material/application. The better question IMO is how will they stack up against concrete?
fletch_961 wrote:Not to mention the equipment needed to install it and the specially trained crew to work it. Asphalt is hot. It burns. Molten glass will burn through you. Do you even know what glass frit is?
I don't think specialty equipment and a trained crew make this unpossible considering that's what asphalt paving involves. Like I mentioned before, what makes it or breaks it is if the described tech can be developed. Yes I know what glass frit is. Do you know (I know you do, but I'm being snarky too ;)) what the difference between HMA and asphalt is?
fletch_961 wrote:So add many millions for concrete footings and steel framing? Or does the glass magically support the load over the panels?
IIRC they mentioned the panels being encased in the glass, which is way different from placing everything on the panels. Saying those two situations are the same is like saying a bug caught in a chunk of Amber is the same as a chunk of Amber on a bug.
fletch_961 wrote:Or a potential cost increase. What is the cost of these capacitors? Why are wind mill farms not using them now?
Quite a few. As are most heavy users/producers that need PF correction. AFAIK, the novel idea would be using them for other purposes besides PF correction alone.
fletch_961 wrote:I'm pretty sure the "something similar w/ asphalt" doesn't include asphalt being a support structure over solar panels.
It's not quite over, more like a support structure (glass) w/ solar panels embedded in 'em.
fletch_961 wrote:I'll bet the idea is more along the lines of using on site RAP, some additional asphalt cement, and a microwave to reheat it on site so that it can be used immediately to re-pave the road bed. Read about the concept a decade ago. Have not heard or seen it practice yet. Now can glass frit be heated and cool without crystallization taking effect on site?
I doubt asphalt could behave in the same way as glass due to it being heterogeneous. Getting the binder flowing again wouldn't be enough to patch holes and whatnot. The aggregate would need to be manipulated too. The only heating that may be done would be such that the glass gets to a high enough temp to absorb microwaves, provided a sacrificial absorber isn't used.
fletch_961 wrote:Maybe were not wearing the same colour glasses. Right now I'm picturing a glass bridge supporting the traffic load over a bunch of solar panels,data/power lines, and maybe even the city sewer mains. How are you picturing this?
You may want to putting on some regular ones and reading the write-ups. What's described was a closer to a solar panel/data & power lines encased in glass. If it was the bottom supporting the top, they could just fabricate everything and set it on a graded surface, no need for new fangled, not yet developed, microwave paving.
fletch_961 wrote:A million dollars revenue per year will barely cover the capital costs to the owners of these panels. Who foots the bill to be the owners of these? The taxpayers?
Having something that will cover it's own capital costs, even after 21 years, sure seems like a nice deal to me. How many other government projects generate enough revenue via methods other than taxation to pay for their costs?
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby Gerben » Thu 03 Sep 2009, 05:20:25

yesplease wrote:
fletch_961 wrote:How?

fletch_961 wrote:Based on?

fletch_961 wrote:Based on?

The document I linked on page two mentions the pertinent info IIRC. There's also another one out there w/ the same basic gist.

No it isn't mentioned there. You have to melt the glass. Since the normal heating like in asphalt trucks is insufficient you'll have to use microwaves to get it upto the desired melting temperature of ~700 C. That will take a lot more energy than your home microwave can deliver. Since the microwave absorption of the material is insufficient, it is suggested to add a material that is easier to heat and will burn off (carbide). (Note that carbide isn't free either.) You'll still need a big electric generator on a big truck to produce a tiny stream of molten glass. With tiny stream I mean: it will take days to melt a truckload. Perhaps it would be more practical to build a multi MW power line next to the road.
User avatar
Gerben
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed 07 Mar 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Holland, Belgica Foederata (Republic of the Seven United Netherlands)

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby fletch_961 » Thu 03 Sep 2009, 05:48:12

The document I linked on page two mentions the pertinent info IIRC.


No it didn't. It made claims. None of which are pertinent to questions I asked. You have made claims, such as the material doesn't have to be heated to high temps. Explain to me how glass frit becomes glass with out the aid of "extreme high temps". What makes you think there will be a reduction in number of person employed to service the utilities and roads?
I didn't mention HMA/AC, just asphalt.

Wouldn't an apples to apples comparison make sense. Why did you pick the ton price of the most expensive component of blacktop (which make up a small fraction of the total mass of HMA) and compare it to the ton price of glass frit?
The difference in longevity means that the binder, ie asphalt, would be about half (15% binder 85% aggregate, three applications) of the current ~$600+/ton price alone, not to mention the cost of the aggregate.

Now you have figures for longevity of this material? Where is this $600 per ton price coming from? Certainly not something current? The cost of aggregate? Really? What is that going for a ton FOB in volume? What do mean the asphalt would be about half the ~$600+/ton alone? What ratio are you using the asphalt? Would it hurt to actually look up the current price of HMA? What is price of this glass frit that has been formulated to clean itself and handle highway traffic?
Sooner or later, asphalt costs will rise to meet glass costs, if they can pull off the material/application. The better question IMO is how will they stack up against concrete?

What makes you think that? Do you know what the cost structure of glass is? link 1link 2
Reported power consumption for all-electric glass-melting furnaces range from 790 kWh per ton up to 1,050 kWh per ton depending on the efficiency of the furnace. Therefore, energy costs can range from about $40 per ton to $53 per ton of glass melted at an average cost of electricity of $0.05 per kWh.

In comparison, fuel-fired regenerative furnaces used for glass-melting consume an estimated 4.5 to 7.5 million Btus per ton of glass melted. Energy costs for fuel-fired furnaces therefore cost about $13.50 per ton to $22.50 per ton (assuming $3.00 per million Btu for natural gas).

Seems to me the energy cost alone per ton is about the same as the finished product when it come to asphalt.
IIRC they mentioned the panels being encased in the glass, which is way different from placing everything on the panels. Saying those two situations are the same is like saying a bug caught in a chunk of Amber is the same as a chunk of Amber on a bug.

So is the molten glass poured right on to the PV panels similar to the bug stuck in sap?
Quite a few. As are most heavy users/producers that need PF correction. AFAIK, the novel idea would be using them for other purposes besides PF correction alone.

Um. You posted that these capacitors would have load leveling capabilities that would be a value added feature. Those are the one I'm asking about. Does solar even need PF correction?
I doubt asphalt could behave in the same way as glass due to it being heterogeneous.

I doubt asphalt would behave in same way as glass too.
Getting the binder flowing again wouldn't be enough to patch holes and whatnot.

Um, yeah, that what the additional asphalt (binder) I mentioned would be for.
The aggregate would need to be manipulated too.

Isn't that what I said or do you not know what RAP is?
The only heating that may be done would be such that the glass gets to a high enough temp to absorb microwaves, provided a sacrificial absorber isn't used.

Wait, what? You have to heat glass so it will absorb microwaves? What are the microwaves for then?
Unfortunately, none of that answer my question. Can glass be made/re-made on-site with out crystallization and to specs.
It's not quite over, more like a support structure (glass) w/ solar panels embedded in 'em.

Embedded or encased? You seem to be using the terms interchangeably.
You may want to putting on some regular ones and reading the write-ups. What's described was a closer to a solar panel/data & power lines encased in glass. If it was the bottom supporting the top, they could just fabricate everything and set it on a graded surface, no need for new fangled, not yet developed, microwave paving.

If you read the OP that is what was posited. The cost was calculated at $12 M per 4-lane mile. Then you show up and want to pour molten glass over the whole thing and somehow came up with a cost of $16 million.
Having something that will cover it's own capital costs, even after 21 years, sure seems like a nice deal to me. How many other government projects generate enough revenue via methods other than taxation to pay for their costs?

Sorry I meant cost of debt. The revenue would maybe pay the interest on the bonds that would have to be floated to pay for this scheme.
User avatar
fletch_961
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Fri 04 Sep 2009, 03:46:39

Gerben wrote:The document I linked on page two mentions the pertinent info IIRC. There's also another one out there w/ the same basic gist.
No it isn't mentioned there. You have to melt the glass. Since the normal heating like in asphalt trucks is insufficient you'll have to use microwaves to get it upto the desired melting temperature of ~700 C. That will take a lot more energy than your home microwave can deliver. Since the microwave absorption of the material is insufficient, it is suggested to add a material that is easier to heat and will burn off (carbide). (Note that carbide isn't free either.)[/quote]Most (All?) of what you just mentioned is in that write up or another one I also mentioned.
Gerben wrote:You'll still need a big electric generator on a big truck to produce a tiny stream of molten glass. With tiny stream I mean: it will take days to melt a truckload. Perhaps it would be more practical to build a multi MW power line next to the road.
The (loosely speaking) melting point of glass depends on the glass, and can be as low as 900F, only ~300F more than hot mix asphalt applications. Based on what I've read, the oxicarbide glass wouldn't need a multi MW since they can be pyrolyzed at ~1500F, compared to typical glass flowing well at ~2800F. That said, it's probably cheaper to provide the majority of energy the conventional way, so i wonder if the microwave portion is only to keep the temperature up so the road can be imprinted during the initial application.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Fri 04 Sep 2009, 03:51:01

fletch_961 wrote:No it didn't. It made claims. None of which are pertinent to questions I asked. You have made claims, such as the material doesn't have to be heated to high temps. Explain to me how glass frit becomes glass with out the aid of "extreme high temps".
Where did I say it didn't have to be heated to high temps? IIRC, I mentioned not having to heat it in the conventional manner, but it probably would be more cost effective to get most of the energy the old fashioned way and use microwaves to insure it's pliable for the imprint.
fletch_961 wrote:What makes you think there will be a reduction in number of person employed to service the utilities and roads?
The same reason on site asphalt recycling reduces costs. Labor tends to be the most expensive part of resurfacing, so reducing that is where we can reduce costs the most.
fletch_961 wrote:Wouldn't an apples to apples comparison make sense. Why did you pick the ton price of the most expensive component of blacktop (which make up a small fraction of the total mass of HMA) and compare it to the ton price of glass frit?
Apples to apples is fine. With the current costs of HMA per lane mile of ~$3000 are only a few precent of costs (~48 tons of HMA per lane mile, at $60/ton). Most of the cost savings in terms of paving, provided the materials/application are worked out in a cost effective way, is from a reduction in labor costs, which are significantly greater than the materials costs. Even on site recycling, which still requires more in the way of labor than the proposed glass setup even though a substantial savings is realized, mostly through the reduction in labor costs given how high they tend to be, would be more expensive. The cost of the glass would have to be much much greater than HMA in order to eat up the difference in labor costs.
fletch_961 wrote:What makes you think that? Do you know what the cost structure of glass is? link 1link 2
I think the structure of HMA paving costs is pertinent too, and where the bulk of a cost difference would come from.
fletch_961 wrote:
Reported power consumption for all-electric glass-melting furnaces range from 790 kWh per ton up to 1,050 kWh per ton depending on the efficiency of the furnace. Therefore, energy costs can range from about $40 per ton to $53 per ton of glass melted at an average cost of electricity of $0.05 per kWh.

In comparison, fuel-fired regenerative furnaces used for glass-melting consume an estimated 4.5 to 7.5 million Btus per ton of glass melted. Energy costs for fuel-fired furnaces therefore cost about $13.50 per ton to $22.50 per ton (assuming $3.00 per million Btu for natural gas).

Seems to me the energy cost alone per ton is about the same as the finished product when it come to asphalt.
It could be. I doubt they would use microwaves for most of the energy when conventional heating is cheaper, but like I said before, costs have to be higher than just double what HMA is to offset the reduction in labor.
fletch_961 wrote:So is the molten glass poured right on to the PV panels similar to the bug stuck in sap?
It's closer than assuming the solar panels are going to provide structural support! ;)
fletch_961 wrote:Um. You posted that these capacitors would have load leveling capabilities that would be a value added feature. Those are the one I'm asking about. Does solar even need PF correction?
It's the integration, like integrating other stuff (power/data), that adds value, since they can be used for more than just PFC.
fletch_961 wrote:Um, yeah, that what the additional asphalt (binder) I mentioned would be for.
Um, yeah, you need more than just binder to fill holes. Aggregate helps too, as per the above link! ;)
fletch_961 wrote:Isn't that what I said or do you not know what RAP is?
That doesn't appear to be what you just said. Ya need more than just extra binder for RAP, be it on on or off site.
fletch_961 wrote:Wait, what? You have to heat glass so it will absorb microwaves? What are the microwaves for then?
Unfortunately, none of that answer my question. Can glass be made/re-made on-site with out crystallization and to specs.
You can heat the glass via conventional methods so it'll absorb microwaves, probably the most cost effective thing to do. Finding a suitable material, along with the application, is what will make or break the idea.
fletch_961 wrote:Embedded or encased? You seem to be using the terms interchangeably.
Embed, at least that's what the write up appears to indicate.
fletch_961 wrote:If you read the OP that is what was posited. The cost was calculated at $12 M per 4-lane mile. Then you show up and want to pour molten glass over the whole thing and somehow came up with a cost of $16 million.
Yeah, it looks like $4 million per four lane miles is way too expensive, but either way using glass, if viable, is a damn sight better than using molten asphalt over solar panels. ;)
fletch_961 wrote:Sorry I meant cost of debt. The revenue would maybe pay the interest on the bonds that would have to be floated to pay for this scheme.
Why would it be done w/ debt as opposed to taxation? In any event, the inflation adjusted return given an interest rate of 3.5% for a 20 year bond seems to be about 10%, certainly a significant cost (lending ain't cheap) but not enough to torpedo something that pays for most or all of it's cost w/o taxation, unlike most government spending.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Fri 04 Sep 2009, 11:00:03

8O You guys really take the cake!!!
Just to add a bit of reality to the discussion.
1. Asphalt pavement is a mixture of rocks, sand and asphalt cement.
2. The asphalt cement is normally about 5% of the mixture by weight but can vary from 4% to7% based on the size of the rocks used as larger rocks have less surface area and need less AC to provide the right film thickness.
3. The mix of rocks and sand is heated to 300+/- deg. F to drive off moisture so the AC can stick to the rocks. Loads delivered to the paver at less then 250F are rejected as colder mix can't be spread and compacted uniformly.
4. Asphalt cement is whats left from a barrel of crude oil after all the gas, diesel, naphtha, and propane etc. is refined out of it. It would be a waste product and be land-filled if it was not so useful for paving and roofing.
5. Crude oil varies in how much AC is in each barrel and there are some natural deposits of straight asphalt. ie. The La Brae tar pits.& Venezuela asphalt lake,
6. The oil companies see no need to give it away and the price goes up and down with the price of oil. Right now it is going for $485 per ton of liquid AC. In September of 08 it would set you back $866 bucks.
7. At the current price of liquid AC a ton of hot mix that cost you $95 complete in place in your road has $24 worth of AC in it.
8. A typical highway has from 10,000 to 35,000 vehicles a day on it with from 5 to 10 percent heavy trucks. Northern snow-belt roads get plowed every two hours or so during storms with plows shod with carbide steel cutting edges.
9. There isn't any glass product that's going to stand up to that at any price. If you want to PV a road you will have to build a continuous snow shed over it and mount the panels on the roof.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby fletch_961 » Fri 04 Sep 2009, 11:06:48

The (loosely speaking) melting point of glass depends on the glass, and can be as low as 900F, only ~300F more than hot mix asphalt applications. Based on what I've read, the oxicarbide glass wouldn't need a multi MW since they can be pyrolyzed at ~1500F, compared to typical glass flowing well at ~2800F. That said, it's probably cheaper to provide the majority of energy the conventional way, so i wonder if the microwave portion is only to keep the temperature up so the road can be imprinted during the initial application.

Really? Your source for the temp of HMA is a patent filed in 1982? But in the real world the temp is closer to 300F. Now find some guys that want to work around something that is 1500F in a non-controlled environment on a hot day. How do you know that oxicarbide glass will meet the spec requirements? What have you read that say oxycarbide glass can be made in a non-controlled environment? You don't know what the microwaves are for? I thought there were patents out there. they should tell you what they are for.
User avatar
fletch_961
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Fri 04 Sep 2009, 11:54:53

pstarr wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:8O You guys really take the cake!!!
Just to add a bit of reality to the discussion.
1. Asphalt p.... ......on the roof.

Excuse me sir. How dare you bring facts into this discussion! There is no place for mundane thinking among us wannabee engineer-types. We are dreamers and we made this great country America even greater by dreaming --Impossible dreams: twinkle twinkle twinkle--to dream the impossible dream--la de da--To fight the unbeatable foe --twinkle twinkle twinkle--To bear with unbearable sorrow --twinkle twinkle twinkle--To run where the brave dare not go. . .

Common sense has no roll in these virtual times. We----The Dreamers----live, eat, sleep, and fornicate bioengineerednanoized thoughts every minute as we dream of man's yet-to-be-realized impossible dreams. We are not strangled with (tied down by and anaesthetized) with lazy old-fashioned regular thinking. Oh no. We have memes and and stuff.

Now take this meme, okay? You pile us all these batteries by the side of the road so the consumer can consume at night when the consume-meme intersects with the shopping-dream.

:lol: 8O :roll: :twisted:
Very well then , Carry on.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Sat 05 Sep 2009, 00:33:16

fletch_961 wrote:Really? Your source for the temp of HMA is a patent filed in 1982? But in the real world the temp is closer to 300F.
It depends on the application, it can be up to 400F. The point was that temperatures above 300F aren't anything new in construction.
fletch_961 wrote:Now find some guys that want to work around something that is 1500F in a non-controlled environment on a hot day.
Clearly anyone will melt instantaneously when near something above ~300F! ;)
When air temperatures dip between 5 and 10°C, use the HAL to warm the rout surface and to remove some humidity. Keep the HAL temperature below 500°C. (The temperature range of the HAL is indicated by the colour at its hot end. If it is bright orange to bright red, the temperature is 600 to 1100°C; if dark red, 500 to 600°C; if black, 400 to 500°C.)

fletch_961 wrote:How do you know that oxicarbide glass will meet the spec requirements? What have you read that say oxycarbide glass can be made in a non-controlled environment? You don't know what the microwaves are for?
The materials and application will make or break the idea. Haven't I mentioned this several times already?
fletch_961 wrote:I thought there were patents out there. they should tell you what they are for.
You thought wrong! ;) At least I haven't seen anything anyhoo...
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby yesplease » Sat 05 Sep 2009, 00:42:03

vtsnowedin wrote:8O You guys really take the cake!!!
Just to add a bit of reality to the discussion.
8. A typical highway has from 10,000 to 35,000 vehicles a day on it with from 5 to 10 percent heavy trucks. Northern snow-belt roads get plowed every two hours or so during storms with plows shod with carbide steel cutting edges.
9. There isn't any glass product that's going to stand up to that at any price. If you want to PV a road you will have to build a continuous snow shed over it and mount the panels on the roof.
Or they (provided the materials and application are worked out, etc, etc) could be built where it doesn't snow. Places like that happen to get more sunlight too!
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Solar Panels Built Into Roads Could Be the Future of Energy

Unread postby fletch_961 » Sat 05 Sep 2009, 05:31:40

With the current costs of HMA per lane mile of ~$3000 are only a few precent of costs (~48 tons of HMA per lane mile, at $60/ton)

Let me help you w/ the math:
One foot thick asphalt road, 5280 ft per mile, 12 ft wide = 63,360 cu ft
~100pounds per cubic ft = 6,336,000 pounds
2000 pounds per ton = 3,168 tons
$60/ton = $190,080.
Now what is the price of this yet to be invented glass per ton delivered? Add what $50 per ton to that just to heat it. How thick will it have to be?
Most of the cost savings in terms of paving, provided the materials/application are worked out in a cost effective way, is from a reduction in labor costs, which are significantly greater than the materials costs.

Really?
Show me the math. What does an asphalt paving crew cost per mile? What does a glass paving crew cost per mile (hypothetically speaking, of course)? Links to the cost of the guys who drive around and patch potholes all day is not exactly a fair gauge of labor costs per square foot, wouldn't you agree?
Clearly anyone will melt instantaneously when near something above ~300F!

Really? I ask where you are going to find the guys to work in high temperature conditions and all you can show me is a puny little blow-torch that puts off a measly 1MMbtu/hour? I've already posted a link for you that shows that it takes up to 7.5x that just to heat one ton of glass (in a controlled facility-designed to minimize input) and you want to lay thousands of tons per mile? I would be worried about trees catching fire, wouldn't you. Imagine molten glass cooling right next a forest.
First, wood is dried as water is vaporized at a temperature of 100 °C (212 °F). Next, the pyrolysis of wood at 230 °C (450 °F) releases flammable gases. Finally, wood can smolder at 380 °C (720 °F) or, when heated sufficiently, ignite at 590 °C (1,100 °F).

What was it you said about glass and temperature? Oh, yeah....
The (loosely speaking) melting point of glass depends on the glass, and can be as low as 900F...
User avatar
fletch_961
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 31 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests