voted this up so I could call you stupid.
just for future reference, a guy saying 'I'm not so sure' or 'I don't believe it' a bunch of times, isn't science.
I don't feel like rating it either way. It's fine to be skeptical, but it's better to be skeptical with evidence than skeptical just to be a contrarian. It's like the Monty Python sketch about wanting an argument but instead someone automatically gainsaying everything you say.
He has a beef that the traction will not be ideal - yet he doesn't realize that asphalt (not ash-fault) has to be repaired, and is not ideal in all conditions, especially rain or ice or snow, and doesn't pay for itself. A solar roadway would melt ice and snow, and pay for itself in terms of generated energy, so even if it cost more in the long term, the energy you'd get back would pay for it.
Granted, they've received 1.7+ million in funds. That's fantastic, but they will need a lot more and eventually it will come to a real road that is built (or parking lot). That will be the real test, and until that test arrives I think Thunderf00t is premature in his assertions that the makers of this are con artists.
It may or may not work as intended, but it still is a fantastic idea with multiple components that could lead to better innovations in a transportation grid.
Not to mention that the more the cost of fossil fuels rises, the more surface area we will be looking at for turning into a solar energy farm, and we will be replacing these roads with either asphalt (not ash-fault) or concrete, or something better, so why not look into alternatives?
He also has a beef with transmitting the electricity even though you really don't need high powered lines everywhere along every stretch of road if you're not going to be harnessing it all (I mean the roads across a city could probably be enough to power that city and that's all they need). And, solar energy can be stored at night through various means. It's not like people haven't thought of that problem before.
I like Thunderf00t, and it's fine to point out problems in things, but sometimes I think he's just being contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian.
I have no interest in people that are not interested in a futuristic cool universe. 5 stars for stupid.
He's no Potholer54, that's for sure.
"Actual science", looool
| Register or login To Post a Comment|