Comment

Comment on An Company(ies) that Converts Classic Automobiles to Automobiles with Solar Panels Built into Their Skins?

I think we may have a language barrier here. Solar panels on a car are a gimmick. They do not do not make significant energy to power the vehicle or change the batteries. The panels made are a sales gimmick to influence people that do not understand the technology and scales of the system. This is like putting the solar cell for a calculator onto an electric bicycle as an equivalent ratio of size and scope. The calculator runs on 3 milliwatts and the bike needs 300 watts.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

Solar panels on a car are a gimmick.

In the case of the Aptera specifically, the integrated solar panels actually do add some meaningful range (40 miles per day) due to how extremely aerodynamic and light the car is.

source
- j4k3@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  I haven’t kept up with things, but that has to be like bicycle level light and lab conditions. I remember people talking about bicycling with solar and the required area was the size of a pickup truck just to power a basic hundred pound-ish touring kit, and even then it was only pedal assist on a cloudy day or hills. That was only 10-13 years ago. The main issue is that panels are not in any way optimally directional in practice. I expect 40 miles is down hill from the continental divide on I40, after parking the thing in the beam of a solar molten salt energy storage array for a day, during peak solar storm activity, but the fuck if I know bugger all. I know Dave did the math about one of the cars back when he was looking at various EVs. IIRC, no solar panels are more than 30% efficient, most are around 20-25% under optimal conditions. Then you half that or more when they are not directional. That gives a best case baseline for the energy they can produce based upon the sun’s output. I know panels have been improving, but we are well past any large scale optimizations and into the phase of scaling production to reduce cost. Do you know what they claim to have changed?
  
  source
  - ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    I was basing that off their own claimed numbers I’d seen quite a while ago, which I admit are likely to artificially optimal and inflated.
    
    Looking into it a bit more, I noticed a good comment under one of their videos that calls out their numbers and provides a more realistic scenario.
    
    100wh/mile is same as 10 miles/kwh lets use 10 miles/kwh easier to understand. That value has never been achieved ( going downhill as they did for their effieciency test they still didnt’ get it, that was downhill 7,000 ft approx) from flagstaff to the coast.
    
    So thats problem number one, and efficiency around town might be even worse, its just not know what any average effiiciency values are, but we do know 10 miles/kwh is not true from their own data. Point 2: he says they can get 700 watts from solar, nope the best they can get is 500watts according to their own solar engineer at ces vegas he said this in jan 2025. And thats the maximum output, its going to be less and can only use averages as any sort of guide.
    
    Even using 500watts your looking at about 2.4kwh per day as an average. So once again they have used a false value…he is very aware of this too , as he is telling you these fabrications.
    
    So lets use more realistic data based on their own data: 6 to 7 miles/kwh and 2.4 kwh/day = approx 14 miles per day average. Thats about half of the average driver daily use in usa ( 30 miles per day).
    
    But it is of course dependent on so many factors its almost certainly going to be a best case scenario, with all conditions perfect.
    
    So my guess is somewhere around 10 miles per day or just over might be some sort of average.
    
    source