paulgipe wrote: ↑
Tue Aug 20, 2019 8:40 am
GRA wrote: ↑
Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:16 pm
Alternatively, people could realize that these are experiments, that some are bound to fail, and that the knowledge gained by these failures will lead to design improvements that may ultimately succeed. Of course, that's not guaranteed, and technical success doesn't guarantee economic success, but a 1/3rd success rate for a new tech's first real-world dem/val isn't bad at all.
The background on this is far worse than the MSM (mainstream media) reports. This is in part because they don't understand the renewables revolution and the politics behind it. They have to accept the official version. In France that version was a special sweetheart deal with friends of the government (can't remember if it was Sarkozy or Hollande). This served the interests of the state by satisfying a major donor and giving the appearance of action when none was taken. It also took the pressure off to do what needed to be done thus avoiding a conflict with EDF, the fourth branch of government. This stunk from the get go. Follow Craig Morris' dissection of this from his perch in Germany. I never wrote about it as it was a waste of electrons.
Thanks, Paul, I've checked out some of Morris' articles. My personal take runs closer to this one (which also cites Morris: https://www.dw.com/en/solar-roadways-a- ... a-19048835
Even if the French deal stunk that doesn't eliminate the value of trying similar approaches, of course they're ridiculously expensive at first, and where you put it makes a lot of difference. My personal feeling is that this approach makes more sense in industrial parks as mentioned in the article above, or parking lots that are often empty during the day such as the typical U.S. shopping mall (with its parking sized for a demand that only happens for a couple of weeks a year prior to Christmas) in addition to rooftop and fixed mount solar, although for the last it might be better to plant deciduous trees instead. However, an even better use of such space is to put buildings on it - the question in my mind is can you produce enough from rooftop PV alone to meet the higher energy density demand of built-up urban areas, especially in cities where tall skinny skyscrapers with limited roof area are the norm? PV as curtain glass may make more sense in such areas, but I'm in favor of seeing which we can make work and finding out what each costs.
Kind of like all those different designs for 1st gen wind turbines I used to see in Altamont Pass, the majority of which were broken down most or all of the time. But the best weren't, and lessons learned there and in similar early areas got us to where we are now with wind.