Nov 28, 2012
Beckler Was wondering if it would be a useful option but a quick calculation shows probably not. Assuming you could get 150W from covering the roof with a flexible panel, that's roughly 1 mi. of range for every 2 hours in full sun. :biggrin: But I suppose in an emergency it could be useful!�
Nov 28, 2012
efusco Maybe to maintain the 12v battery it would have a small benefit, but at a pretty high cost.
Evan, Via Tapatalk�
Nov 28, 2012
strider It's a gimmick on the Karma. The weight and cost would negate any benefit. I would rather have the glass sunroof.�
Nov 28, 2012
vfx And the Leaf.�
Nov 28, 2012
doug A small solar panel (as on the Leaf) can have the benefit of maintaining the 12V battery and exchanging the cabin air when it's sunny out. The solar panel on the Karma is primarily for cosmetic reasons.�
Nov 28, 2012
Rodolfo Paiz I don't think the technology is yet to the point where it's an easy snap-in, and the weight/cost value proposition isn't there in my eyes considering how little time many of these cars will spend "in full sun." I'm betting that a very large percentage of these cars will live in garages and only collect sunlight while they're out running errands, so the solar panel is not a good investment.
I'd rather put the solar panels on the house, and have them working hard all the time.�
Nov 28, 2012
Ardie Sunlight is pretty weak. You need a large amount of surface area to collect enough sunlight to do anything useful. There's a reason mother nature never made plants that could run around.
The square footage on the car's roof isn't enough to run the car's heater or air conditioner, but it may be enough to run them in some sort of reduced capacity mode.
Anyway, it ought to be enough power to run a circulating pump for the battery coolant, or cabin ventilation fan, or a Wi-Fi connection.
The best use might be a way to keep the battery from dying completely (aka: "bricking"), but it isn't guaranteed to work if you keep it a dark garage...
-- Ardie�
Nov 28, 2012
kinddog And the Prius.
- - - Updated - - -
exactly. they know this thing will be indoors when not driving. it would push the expense of the Tesla even higher.
that said, i wish for the standard roof they put two little air-flow humps on it (a la Prius). that would look badass.�
Nov 28, 2012
ckessel As others have noted, too little surface area and too much cost. I suggest reading this excellent analysis of why cows aren't solar powered, it humorously covers similar analysis.
Green Cows�
Nov 28, 2012
jerry33 The one on the Prius adds $1500 and just runs a fan to keep the car close to ambient when parked. Not even remotely worth it in my opinion. Keeping the window open a small amount accomplishes the same thing for free.�
Nov 28, 2012
100thMonkey it's a nice fashion statement but the real place for PV is on one's roof at home!�
Nov 28, 2012
Doug_G To me solar cells on a car says "greenwashing". It's faux green. We all know the panels that size don't make enough energy to do much of anything, and you have to carry the weight around.�
Nov 28, 2012
bosgig I think a crank on the side would come in really handy! :biggrin:
I joke. . .actually I was wondering the same thing (although it would mess up the pano!)�
Nov 28, 2012
brianman Cue link to post of Fisker review which talks about "500 years parked in direct sunlight 24x7 in Arizona" (and still not worth it) or whatever it was.�
Nov 29, 2012
derekt75 Am I the only one that parks my car in the sun outside my office 5 days a week?
Regardless, a 25 W panel might cost $100 and generate maybe 25kWh (75 miles) of electricity over a year. Even at PG&E's punitive $0.34/kWh, that's still not great.
Panels on my roof are cost effective because you can get them cheaper when you buy big heavy panels, and they produce more power when they're always outside. Also, I can sell electricity to PG&E at the daytime rate and charge my EV at their night time rate (well, assuming Model S will have some kind of charge timer at some point).�
Nov 29, 2012
pilotSteve Plus with solar cells on your roof (implying your car is then in the shade) you will save battery on cooling! Its hard to estimate but my guess is that a car sized solar panel would not even generate enough power to take the heat out of the interior! External cells are a triple win: (a) bigger surface area, more power (c) not carried around with you, added weight and (c) your car stays cooler (or snow free for the winter set) without using battery for temp control!�
Dec 3, 2012
JRP3 Two words: Vampire Load. 100 watt's worth of solar panel would counter a large portion of the S vampire load and would allow a much longer airport parking situation without much capacity loss.�
Dec 3, 2012
Rodolfo Paiz Seven words: still not worth the costs and tradeoffs.�
Dec 3, 2012
JRP3 Depends if you come back from a long trip and don't have enough range to get where you want to go. Then it's priceless :wink:�
Dec 3, 2012
dsm363 The drain should be down to 2 miles a day now. If that's too much, you're probably gone for a really long time and should either find a place with a least a 110V outlet or take a taxi to the airport and leave it plugged in at home. I'd rather have the pano roof that a solar panel that is rarely needed.�
Dec 3, 2012
doug Yeah, I'd prefer covered parking and a plug.�
Dec 3, 2012
JRP3 They could build the solar panel into the hood, and you get to keep your pano roof. :smile: In full disclosure I'm irrationally attracted to on board solar power.
�
Dec 4, 2012
doug Might as well add windmills while you're at it.�
Dec 4, 2012
JRP3 The Fiero pictured has what looks like 500 watts of solar, lets say 6 hours total of rated output when parked at work for 8 hours, 2000 whs, 300wh/mi, 6.6 miles of range. That's more than half of my normal daily driving range.�
Jan 20, 2013
GlennAlanBerry Solar PV Panels on the Roof of a Model S
I have sometimes wondered why there is not a factory option to have solar PV cells embedded in the surface of the roof of the Model S. The surface area of the roof would probably allow you to get perhaps 300-500 watts of output, depending on the efficiency of the cells.
This could give you a just a little bit of extra range while driving in the daylight, or help diminish the range loss from battery pack heating and cooling (assuming you were parked in the sunlight).
I have a little 3.1KW Solar PV system on the roof of my house with ten 315W SunPower panels. The size of one of those panels seems to be a little less than the area of a Model S roof. Of course, if you were getting 400 watts out of these panels, as you were driving your 85kWh Models S slowly for five hours on a sunny day, that would only be 2kWh out of the roof panels. It would probably be more useful while you were parked at the airport on a long trip (and you could not plug in to a 110 volt "trickle charge").
But, it would sort of look high-tech...�
Jan 21, 2013
clmason Has anyone researched these Portable Foldable Solar Chargers? PowerFilm FM16-7200 120 Watt 7200mA 15.4 Volts Foldable Solar Charger - Khaki Only 120 Watt 7200mA 15.4 Volts Foldable Solar Charger - Khaki Only
What specs would a portable solar charger need in order to provide 5 miles of range to the Model S in a couple hours.
Question for someone with more technical knowledge than I; are we close to this being a viable emergency charging system for the Model S? How many years out?�
Jan 21, 2013
JRP3 Let's say you need 300 watt hours per mile, 5 miles of range, 1500 watt hours. For simplicity you need 5 hours of sun on a 300 watt hour array, or 2.5 hours of sun on a 600 watt hour array.�
Jan 21, 2013
dwhite Somehow I don't think a 5-7 watt solar panel (one square foot) will do much for an 85,000 watt battery.�
Jan 22, 2013
olanmills It would be quite expensive for almost no benefit.�
Jan 23, 2013
EchoDelta I've had those (at smaller sizes/powers) for powering laptops and Hughes BGAN antennas. Worked like a charm. But the power draw is very different, i never needed more than 300W.
For "emergency" situations for cars not sure you could do much with it also considering efficiencies DC-alternator-etc at higher currents etc. But this is all theory - See if you can test one!
There are many types of emergencies - you ended up in the boonies with no charge after a night of drunk driving and you don't know where anything is (but your car), you are 4 miles away from your home with kids onboard and no charge because you detoured for milk after a regular 260 mi driving day, you met the love of your life at an unexpected highway junction in the cold weather and parked there on the shoulder for a week, a flat tire in a place with no cell signal, stuck in snow or mud, you are running away from the law into the forest, you are escaping a nuclear fallout plume at max speed as you see civilization collapse around you and you know the grid won't be back up for centuries... etc.
Not sure given the few situations where the panel could make a substantive difference would justify lugging the thing around all the time vs. having ranger service + AAA. A cheap charged cell phone with a high-gain external antenna that can take your SIM card is probably a better investment. But yeah, to charge the car from a foldable solar panel does sound cool.�
Aug 16, 2013
MarkR I'm not in favor of solar "panels" on a Model S, but solar paint on a Model S/X may be an option in a few years if the research at Notre Dame and USC is successful. The current crop of solar paint is far to inefficient to be of any practical value, but turning cars, homes, and commercial buildings into solar generating stations would solve our energy problems rather quickly.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111221211324.htm�
Aug 17, 2013
JRP3 Except that paint is much less efficient than any solar cell available, so it would do even less on a vehicle, and basically nothing on any area besides the hood, roof and trunk, where a conventional panel could be fitted, providing much more power. Personally I'd rather have a solar panel instead of a pano roof. It would counteract the remaining vampire load and allow the car to sit indefinitely without any worry, plus gain a few miles each day for free.�
Aug 17, 2013
jerry33 Any gain would be offset by the extra weight using current technology. A solar panel would be far heavier than the pano roof. Toyota only allows certain options with the solar panel because it would overload the car--and that solar panel is only good enough to run a ventilating fan. Solar panels belong on the roof of your house, not on the roof of your car.�
Aug 17, 2013
JRP3 Depends on the panel, but a quick search the first 150 watt panel I found was 25lbs. I bet the pano roof weighs more than that. That's a stand alone panel with it's own frame, an integrated panel would weigh less. A single 150 Watt panel at 6 hours of full output in an 8 hour day is 900 watt hours, which should counter the reduced vampire drain of the 5.0 software. Better panels with higher efficiencies could do even more, and I expect as they get better and cheaper we will indeed see them on vehicles, at least as an option.�
Aug 17, 2013
techmaven I own Helios 6T 240 watt mono-crystalline solar panels. They are around $325 new and are about 3' x 5'. The vast majority of the 50 lb weight is the protective glass top layer, which would be redundant with the pano roof option.
The primary reasons I want a solar option have nothing to do with charging the main traction battery. For me, it is all about the 12v system and 12v accessories. First is the spate of 12v battery failures. I would want a solar panel to be able to power up the traction battery even if the 12v lead acid battery is dead. Further, it can charge the 12v battery and reduce the possibility that it goes dead even though they are now using deep cycle batteries. I would also want it to be able to power up the main control systems that respond to the smartphone apps. Finally, I want that extra power available to user accessories.�
Aug 17, 2013
AC1K a solar option for the pano roof maybe an option when current photo voltaic cells stop sucking.
currently a 3x5 panel with a max output of 250W is 17% efficient, now some companies (sharp) have created a prototype 44% cell, at the same panel size it should make 650W, you cover the rear window as well and you could possibly make 1kW.
at 1kW the car could recharge itself to 90% in 8 hours (long summer day).
But if you drove to work and parked on the top of the parkade it should top off the battery as your trip probably wasn't 400kms.�
Aug 17, 2013
Musterion What?? Even with your generous assumption of 1kW charging, you are only about an order of magnitude off.�
Nov 24, 2013
brianman
Rough transcript from 2:00:
�
Nov 24, 2013
bonnie Brianman, you should be flogged for bumping this thread. Go to your corner.�
Nov 24, 2013
brianman I needed to update it for the quote because I got tired of just saying "watch the Fisker video". Now I can link to the text content. Like in my reply to Raffy's post.
There's a method to my madness, usually.�
Nov 25, 2013
VolkerP This solar roof question keeps popping up when talking about EVs. The return on investment calculation dismisses them, but the thought seems more to originate from "how to extend the range" question. And a lot of EV engineering deals with efficiency & saving power - so it remains an obvious question to harvest power while you are on the road.�
Nov 25, 2013
montgom626 No need.�
Nov 25, 2013
JRP3 What better way to kill the Vampire Load than with a burst of sunshine :biggrin:�
Nov 25, 2013
jerry33 That sounds good, but the weight of the solar panels reduces their effectiveness and raises the centre of gravity. Until solar panels get much more efficient, they belong on the roof of your house, not on the roof of your car.�
Nov 25, 2013
bonnie You see what you did. -narrowed eyes-�
Nov 25, 2013
JRP3 You can't kill the dream�
Nov 26, 2013
lloyds We will keep dreaming�
Nov 26, 2013
Raffy.Roma In my dreams I see a transparent top including high efficiency solar panels on Tesla Models.
- - - Updated - - -
But what if in 5 years Tesla will produce the transparent top of my dreams? Then brianman will tell me: "Raffy your dreams came true"�
Nov 26, 2013
taraquin If I remember correct, the early versions of a Skoda Octavia test fleet had solarpanels. In standard daylight aka Germany it could produce 0,2 kWh. On a whole year basis it was expected to produce somewhere between 500-1000 kWh, which actually translates to stop the vampire-leak + add som range when parked outside with no available charger. If it is worth the cos`t? Probably not, but if optimized to produce more kWh it could be an actual range-saver in some settings.�
Nov 26, 2013
Raffy.Roma Also the Class E Mercedes had the solar panels top. Don't know how much power they produced, but such a top was very nice to see. I think that TMC Members are right when they say that the power produced from such solar panels is too low to be worth installing them on Tesla Models. Hope that in the future such solar panels will have a higher efficiency.�
Nov 26, 2013
JRP3 I'd bet an integrated panel weighs less than the pano glass, as I discussed a few posts back, and no one seems to worry about the pano roof raising the center of gravity.
To me the pano serves no real function where a solar panel would.�
Nov 26, 2013
Cottonwood Many cars like the Audi, use these small panels for things like summer ventilation. There, 10-20 Watts can run a small fan and do a lot to exhaust the hot air from the cabin, drawing in cool air from under the car. This can lower the cabin temperature 10's of degrees in a sunny, summer location when parked for hours. To get enough power to add more than a few miles of range a day, takes more area than the top of a car. As others have said, put the panels on the roof of your house, not the roof of your car.�
Nov 26, 2013
Doug_G Don't even give them the "until" bit. The problem is, even if solar cells were 100% efficient there's still no point in putting them on the roof of a car. Sunlight simply isn't that dense. It's not enough surface area to make a difference, and you don't want to be carrying the extra weight around.
I thought this bad idea thread had finally died a well-deserved death...�
Nov 26, 2013
brianman You'll know it's done after the government subsidizes this idea and we've spent 9 digits of taxpayer money realizing the mistake broadly.
Better to make the point clear in the thread where it's discussed than to bury the thread and have a new one spawn monthly or weekly.�
Nov 26, 2013
JRP3 At some point they could be cheap enough and light enough that it does make some sort of sense. Maybe more sense than a pano roof that adds weight and cost but essentially provides nothing tangible in return.
http://www.gizmag.com/via-motors-solar-panel-tonneau-cover/29844/ :biggrin:�
Nov 26, 2013
Raffy.Roma @JRP3
Very interesting, but I would like it also be transparent (if possible) for Tesla.�
Nov 26, 2013
Rodolfo Paiz We don't all agree. I love my pano roof, for a bunch of reasons.�
Nov 26, 2013
bonnie Except it had been THREE months (not monthly or weekly) til revived by ... oh who was it, lemme think [cue jeopardy music] ... thinking .... wait, I have it, I have it! .... YOU!�
Nov 26, 2013
SwedishAdvocate :biggrin:
And Tesla would have to be able to sell it. And allocate the engineering resources. If it would have been a 5000$ option on the Karma, what would it cost on the Model S? Would anyone be interested in paying that?�
Nov 26, 2013
brianman I take it you didn't notice that the thread is linked to by the FAQ wiki and that a recent re-raising of the idea was replied to with a link to that FAQ wiki entry. When commenting on a "new idea" and pointing to an "old entry" in a wiki, I like to make sure that what the wiki points to is actually useful. And prior to the new post, my prior reference to "the Fisker video comment" wasn't as useful as I wanted it to be.�
Nov 27, 2013
JRP3 And I expect most people with the pano roof would not agree with me. I've always thought a sunroof was a pretty useless gimmick, but that's just me, obviously many love them.
If thine thread offend thee, pluck it out. Or something.
If VIA motors can offer a full truck bed solar cover for $2K I'd bet Tesla could do something similar. How much is the pano roof option? I'm not saying that Tesla should do this now, but possibly at some point it might make sense.�
Nov 27, 2013
aaronw Quick answer is no. The Fisker Karma has one. I've seen cost estimates of $5000 and payback on the order of 500 years. A 100 watt solar panel will provide roughly 1 mile of range after 3 hours of sitting in the sun assuming it's actually generating 100 watts. I would much rather have the panoramic roof.�
Nov 27, 2013
aronth5 If it's solar paint then count me in:smile:
Like many announcements that never make it to market- here is one on the next "big thing" solar paint. http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Solar-PaintThe-Next-Big-Thing.html�
Nov 28, 2013
yme I don't see how a solar panel could possibly be transparent. It has to absorb the sunlight in order to convert it to electricity.�
Nov 28, 2013
techmaven I don't understand this whole thing about weight. The primary weight of a solar panel is the glass protective layer. The next big item is usually the aluminum frame. The rest is extremely lightweight. Therefore, compared to the pano roof option, there would be almost no weight difference. We are talking about a pound or two here, mostly in the wiring harness.
The primary reason for me is to maintain the 12v battery, power the 12v inside outlets, and the battery management as well as the 3G interface. This way it may be possible to power up the car even if the 12 volt battery has died. Plus, it would be possible for the car to respond to the smartphone app immediately even in energy saver mode when there is sunshine. Powering the 12 volt accessories like the inside outlet would allow things like dash cams to run (motion sensing mode for example), or charge phones. While it won't have enough power to run heat or air conditioning, it would be enough to run the fan that draws in air through the cabin air filter.
Again, a mono crystalline 3 foot by 5 foot solar panel runs about $350 that generates about 200 watts. The pano roof option is currently $2,500. It used to cost $1,500 not too long ago. I would bet that the solar option which is basically a clear pano roof and the cells + 12v charge controller costs less than the pano roof option which has the pano roof opening mechanism (stepper motor + rails + gaskets) + tinting. The wiring harness cost difference is probably not all that much.
I did not buy the pano roof option, but I would have paid $2,500 for a solar cell option that would have brought peace of mind with the 12v battery issues, instant response to the smartphone app during the day, lower vampire drain (maybe even zero on balance), and the ability to power things like dash cams and charge phones off solar.�
Nov 28, 2013
Raffy.Roma I saw a Mercedes Class E with a transparent top containing solar panels. This happened some years ago. Hope that this technology has improved.
- - - Updated - - -
Interesting.�
Nov 28, 2013
JRP3 Exactly. Worth noting that thin film solar has hit the 20% efficiency mark. At some point a solar panel option is most likely going to be a reality.�
Nov 28, 2013
yme Perhaps that roof converts some of the incident sunlight to electricity and lets the rest through. In that case, it would look as if it had a more or less dark tint, and it wouldn't generate as much electricity as a solar panel that absorbed all of the light that fell on it.�
Dec 2, 2013
VolkerP Solar cells approach 140�m thickness and are translucent, especially at wavelengths that have less energy than the absorption threshold. The result is a brownish transparency. So it's really much like a 80% tinted pano roof. Solar panels are opaque because of the black outdoor-rated polyvinyl film which laminates the cells to the glass.
I would like to see 180W solar cells laminated onto the rear half of the (clear glass) pano roof, using transparent film material. Keeps the 12V topped up and disables sleep mode during daylight.�
Dec 2, 2013
Raffy.Roma @Volker
You mean that in your pic the transparent windows are solar cells and the opaque windows are solar panels?�
Dec 2, 2013
SwedishAdvocate Opaque means that something is not transparent (or translucent). And in the picture they're all transparent or translucent. So, the darker ones are the solar cells, and therefore there are no solar panels in the picture.�
Dec 2, 2013
VolkerP Swede is correct.
A picture search for "transparent solar cell" mostly brings organic ones. They have poor efficiency, need more research. The silicon based ones could be better described as "translucent" so they would not really form a roof where you can look through at the sky.�
Dec 2, 2013
lloyds It will happen one day. The current ones are just not efficient enough though to make any practical sense.�
Dec 3, 2013
brianman Translucent.�
Dec 3, 2013
SwedishAdvocate Thanks for pointing that out.
The Swedish language doesn�t have a corresponding word� I guess maybe it�s kind of similar to other difficulties some of us Swedes sometimes encounter when setting out to communicate in English� :redface:
I have amended the post in question.�
Dec 3, 2013
brianman Heh. Amusing link.�
Dec 30, 2013
JRP3 Possibly one step closer to reality: http://phys.org/news/2013-12-team-thin-photovoltaic-device-high.html#nRlv�
Dec 30, 2013
aaronw The Fisker Karma has a solar roof. It is estimated that the roof adds another $5000 to the cost and all it is capable of doing is keeping the 12v battery topped off and running the blower to help keep the interior cool. The estimated ROI for the solar roof is around 500 years at current electricity rates. I would much rather take the money it cost to install a solar panel on the roof and install solar on my house. Instead of running the blower to keep the interior cool all I need to do is crack open my pano roof and it's only $1500 vs $5000.�
Dec 31, 2013
jerry33 It also adds a lot of weight at the top so the centre of gravity is raised. Solar panels are for houses, not cars. Maybe in fifty years...�
Dec 31, 2013
SwedishAdvocate This was posted up-thread (#65):
The Pano roof is currently $2500 in the US. The other three paragraphs from that post up-thread:
Seems to me it comes down to price, whether or not there�s demand to justify development and production, and whether or not Tesla can allocate the engineering resources.�
Dec 31, 2013
JRP3 Since you keep repeating this in the face of evidence to the contrary I will repeat what Swedish said, thin film solar panels are not heavy. At some point you'll grasp this fact, hopefully.
Regarding the cost of the panel on the Karma, just because Fisker ripped people off with their pricing it has little relation to what can be done.
To summarize, solar panels are not heavy, they are not as expensive as the Karma panels, and they have the potential to do more than just charge the 12V battery. They would also provide more real world value than a pano roof, but could be made transparent, so you could potentially have both.�
Dec 31, 2013
SwedishAdvocate You�re too kind. :redface: I think it�s techmaven that deserves the credit though��
Dec 31, 2013
JRP3 A number of us have said it, for some reason it's not sinking in.�
Dec 31, 2013
AmpedRealtor I didn't want to read through 8 pages, so forgive me if this was mentioned. The Fisker Karma made use of solar cells on its roof. It was integrated quite nicely with the vehicle's design. The same can be said for the Prius. The cells may not generate enough power to charge the traction battery, but they can definitely power on-board systems and charge the 12v while parked. Solar cells can also help mitigate some vampire loss.
From a design and marketing perspective, adding solar cells to Model S would be a welcome change.�
Dec 31, 2013
JRP3 You could have at least read some of the pages, Capt. Redundant :wink: But yes, agree on all points.�
Jan 2, 2014
hileyms According to MSN today in the UK, Ford C-Max developed with solar panel on roof.
"According to Ford, this sun-worshipping C-Max can pull in 8kW of rays during a typical day � more than enough to fully charge the standard Energi�s 7.6kW battery pack. This means the Solar version can deliver the exact same 21-mile electric-only range"
"8kW in a matter of hours from a solar panel the size of a car roof is very good going, something Ford has managed with the help of the Georgia Institute of Technology. The university has developed a special �Fresnel� lens to help amplify the sunshine by up to eight times."
So Model S 60kwh needs a roof space 7.5 times bigger that a Ford C-Max.�
Jan 2, 2014
Theshadows Absolutely no way. Using the most efficient panels on the world (SunPower x21 345w) you would need 80 square feet for a 1.6kw system. Thin film is 1/3 as efficient. And that 1.6kw system is assuming your roof is tilted optimally at the sun with no shading for 5 hours.�
Jan 2, 2014
richkae Agreed.
You should be wary of numbers from marketing drivel.
One clue that it is not meaningful is that the units are wrong, meaning that whoever wrote it doesn't even understand it.
A fresnel lens can concentrate light, but it can not amplify it.�
Jan 2, 2014
SwedishAdvocate Why isn�t it flush with the roof?
Image Credit: Ford Motor Company?
Image Credit: Ford Motor Company?�
Jan 2, 2014
JRP3 So it magically grabs rays of light that were not going to hit the roof, amazing!
http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/02/ford-c-max-solar-energi-concept-/
Because of the Fresnel lens.
- - - Updated - - -
OK, there is more rational detail in this article. The car is supposed to be parked under a Fresnel lens canopy.
http://www.worldcarfans.com/114010268187/ford-unveils-c-max-solar-energi-concept-with-solar-panel�
Jan 2, 2014
Raffy.Roma The FORD solar rooftop is interesting but I wouldn't like it for the Model S because it's not nice from an esthetical point of view. As Elon said the Model S has to be the best car in the world from all points of view, also from the esthetical point of view.
So I am waiting for a nicer transparent solar roof (solar cells?) for the Model S.�
Jan 2, 2014
richkae OK this is cute, but it is super super niche and complicated. You need both the fresnel canopy and space for the car to move around under it - but that is going to have one optimal day of the year, so the canopy will need to adjust for the sun angle at different times of the year.
If you are going to install infrastructure, you might as well put in a plug and put solar panels on the structure itself.�
Jan 2, 2014
Discoducky The engineer in me says, "WOW, that looks cool!" and "That tech is really forwarding solar tech in cars!". But then my design side says "That is not very pleasing to my eye".
Regardless, very cool to see Ford progressing the idea and applying it to their hybrid where it seems to currently make the most sense.
Will be interesting to see the actual specs as the marketing spin is quite thick as it seems to need the special canopy to realize faster charging and might not even get 1kwh without it under 'normal' daylight conditions.�
Jan 2, 2014
Theshadows I think you are spot on. Looking at the picture, if it's an accurate rendering. The three panels total 84 solar cells. Standard solar panels consist of 60 or 72 cells. Realistically it's probably 300-350 watts.
IMO it's nothing more than a marketing gimmick.�
Jan 2, 2014
JRP3 Let's say 300 watts, x 6 hours a day = 1.8kWh / 320wh/mi = 5.6 miles a day, 2,053 miles a year. I'll take that.�
Jan 2, 2014
vfx Cool stuff Ford is doing.
I can't belive moving the car is better than pitching the lens array.�
Jan 2, 2014
Discoducky
If you were in the market for that car what would you pay for this option? I expect the panels to be a 2K option and have no idea for the canopy.�
Jan 2, 2014
JRP3 As I've posted up thread I'd be much more willing to pay 2K for a panel array that provides some energy than for a pano roof that does not, and in fact increases my cooling loads and aero drag when open and costs me energy. Also, as previously posted, if Via Motors is only charging 2K for a 10kW truck bed cover a smaller integrated panel should cost less.
I would not however bother with the concentrating canopy.�
Jan 2, 2014
Theshadows In Phoenix in full sun all of the time no shading with a flat roof it would make 462kwh per year. 1444 miles.
I see your point though, I just think there are better ways to capture the suns energy than by placing a few cells on the roof of a hybrid.
To me it looks like the ICE manufactures are trying to show that they are embracing green energy while still trying to hold on to their old ways.�
Jan 2, 2014
richkae Your car sits outside in the sun all day every day?
Mine is in a garage the majority of the time. Not worth a penny to me.�
Jan 2, 2014
JRP3 I'm usually not parked in a garage during the day. I suspect most people are the same.�
Jan 2, 2014
Raffy.Roma Agree. You got the main point IMO.�
Jan 3, 2014
tezco Absolutely love the solar panels on my old Audi A8. Never burn my thighs on those seats when it's outside in the summer, and they are covered in black leather! Or, if they could allow the MS to stay alseep at the airport for weeks on end, would be worth it.�
Jan 3, 2014
Grendal I'm not against the idea. It would be nice for those that want it as an add-on. Maintaining the integrity of the Model S's great looks would critical. A roof panel or a cool spoiler might work.�
Jan 3, 2014
MarkR The solar panels on the roof of my office building and on my house are great, cost-effective, and environmentally sound.
Solar panels on the roof of a car are just an expensive gimmick, not cost-effective, and an environmental waste of resources.�
Jan 3, 2014
pxy A partial success that Ford is promoting EV research (!), but let's honestly hope they are keeping the real sauce secret or something. I'm surprised the Fisker Karma roof wasn't mentioned just for implementation, it's actually quite complementary visually (not that it was ever electrically integrated):
EDIT: It was mentioned page 1 :wink:
Ford and all other manufacturers sure better be trying new things in the lab, on mules, and in the field. It's the longer path to finding the answer (that solar doesn't solve a stubbornly small battery capacity) but is likely to pave the road to core technology and IP for them along the way.
My opinion is as a functional device, Tesla shouldn't offer a solar roof until it improves some function of the car. Put that money towards solar infrastructure over superchargers.�
Jan 4, 2014
JRP3 So you see no real benefit in being able to leave your car unplugged for an indefinite period and not have the battery drain below usable levels? Sure it's great to have solar at home and work, since few have the option of work place solar you are something of a special case. Thin film solar panels on a vehicle are hardly a waste of resources, especially when compared to an entire 4500lb vehicle that's moving a single individual most of the time.�
Jan 4, 2014
liuping I would assume the number of people who leave their Tesla parked out in the sun, unplugged for an indefinite period is very low.
The only likely scenario I can think of is parking at an airport, and even then I would seek covered parking (either at the airport or offsite) or leave my Tesla safe at home, before I'd leave it out in the elements for days or weeks at a time.�
Jan 4, 2014
tezco Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I see many expensive cars out in the sun at private airports, many with portable PV panels plugged into the lighter....The panels on my Audi moonroof are barely noticable, but the benefit is dramatic.�
Apr 21, 2014
SwedishAdvocate There�s been some posts about solar panels on top of the roof of the Model S here (Post #640):
Tesla in Australia? | TMC
I think a Station Wagon Concept Car at some point in time would be a pretty neat thing when Tesla has started to accumulate enough resources. Then they could join the other car manufacturers and present a Station Wagon Concept Car at perhaps the Geneva or the Frankfurt Motor Show. And that Station Wagon Concept could perhaps have a regular panoramic sunroof just like the current Model S has, and then the roof over the stations wagon part cold be covered by a solar panel that hopefully could cover vampire drain for people interested in such an option (as well as those who just have to max out the order sheet :wink: ).�
Apr 21, 2014
Chipper This has been brought up before but it seems totally impractical to me. The amount of gain would be minimal. The panel would obviously not be ideally oriented and it would only work when parked/driven in the sun. It would certainly NOT be an option I would pay for or even want.�
Apr 21, 2014
EchoDelta I think I read your post as: As long as there's a station wagon involved as an option to put it on, you're into whatever accessory.�
Apr 21, 2014
SwedishAdvocate Well, station wagons are popular in Europe
A factory mounted towing hook option would also be nice�
:smile:�
Apr 22, 2014
Kitt Not yet. In 20 years all e-cars will have i am sure. Those will be low cost perovskit flexible panels. 30% conversion rate. like 1,3kw peak on the whole surface.
E-cars will weigh only 800 kgs. thus need less energy. Though in cities with big buildings it will be still diffiuclt.
A luxury but perovskit solar panels are expected to be darn cheap.
BIg parking buildings will be designed differently as today. With light channels etc.....Parking places in sun....solar architecture
look a 900kg e-car.
http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fcleantechnica.com%2Ffiles%2F2013%2F09%2Fineco-5.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcleantechnica.com%2F2013%2F09%2F11%2Felectric-ineco-concept-weighs-less-than-2000-pounds%2F&h=350&w=620&tbnid=8b53CYw8Pm815M%3A&zoom=1&docid=nehITOypBxs_FM&ei=1sVWU60gg860Bv7CgOAJ&tbm=isch&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=837&page=1&start=0&ndsp=12&ved=0CFsQrQMwAQ
A car with that weight and covered with solar panels for California certainly a big deal. :love:�
Apr 22, 2014
Cottonwood Or a pickup truck! VIA Motors SOLTRUX Solar Cover Option for Electric VTRUX | VIA Motors�
Apr 24, 2014
Kitt Apropos Solar Panels. Anyone here who charges his Tesla on the week ends with his own solar power? I have calculated that u could sustain 75% of your annual commute this way(for Germany,5kw peak).�
Apr 24, 2014
SwedishAdvocate Poll: Charging with your own Solar Power ?
Living with Solar and Model S
Solar installer/company in NoVA/DC
SolarCity solar installation
Residential Solar System - PV to EV
Thinking of going with this solar installer/proposal. Please comment/critique/discuss
Solar Power Switch On party
I think there�s a thread somewhere here on TMC where a few folks have posted pictures of their solar power installations, but I couldn�t find it through a quick search��
Apr 24, 2014
AC1K Heres my thought...
the absolute theoretical max energy you can make is 1.3kW / m�
the glass roof lets say is 2m�
and lets say you have by some miracle a 50% efficient transparent solar panel, (46% panels exist in a lab, and transparent panels exist but not together)
you are making 1.3kW's of power which is the same as leaving your vehicle plugged into a regular Nema 5-15 socket. that's not bad IMO but these numbers are way too optimistic for today's solar tech. so until we hit 50% or greater efficiency , its useless.
now if you are able to throw 35-40% efficient panels on your house and cover ever sq mm of the roof, you should be able to net zero your usage along with the car and i believe that is a far better approach.�
Apr 24, 2014
JRP3 As I've said I'd give up a pano roof that provides nothing of value to me for a solar panel that does, so it need not be transparent, plus there is a good amount of surface area on the frunk as well. My property is also heavily wooded so solar at home is not an option.�
Apr 24, 2014
darthvdr I used to work for a PV manufacturer and this topic comes up very frequently. Efficiency in solar panels is not sufficient to power the MS. The technology is rapidly improving, but it will take a significant breakthrough in pv absorption / efficiency for it make any sense in its use for autos.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét