The US government got tricked into funding (2 Million dollars) to Solar Roadways

>The US government got tricked into funding (2 Million dollars) to Solar Roadways
How are first world governments this fucking retarded?
youtube.com/watch?v=Yg64h2jrDVw

How can I trick the US or German Government into giving me money for free?

Other urls found in this thread:

euanmearns.com/nuclear-capital-costs-three-mile-island-and-chernobyl/
solarroadways.com/Research/Research
instituteforenergyresearch.org/studies/energy-subsidies-study/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>How can I trick the US or German Government into giving me money for free?

>he doesn't know about white mans welfare

get your buddies in the DoD or DoE to write off on your project and make sure to include them as """"project manager"""" for a sizable salary.

Democrats borrowing against money of our great grandchildren to "create jobs" by giving money to cronies.

>Government not willing to fund Fussion or Fission
>But willing to spend half a mil on this
We are doomed.

nuclear power is too politically hot.

>worried about the government spending 2 million dollars on r&d
>half the budget goes to making war stuff
>the fossil fuels, big AG, and commercial fishing industries, amoung many other deplorable agents, all get billions of dollars in subsidies every year
>cares about this when the world bank is giving loans for subcontracted genocide and ecological destruction all over the world with 75% US funding.
Unimportant bullshit that's been way oversimplified and attacked with bias at least they are trying to develop something productive.
And you need to have money before the nanny state will give you more money

2 million is peanuts. Risk vs reward.

>Lay down solar roadways
>Truck with muddy tires renders them inoperable

NO ONE COULD HAVE POSSIBLY FORSEEN THIS

LEDs and heating elements are retarded but having solar panels in driveways isn't.

Yeah, because the average citizen and politician is retarded.
>B-But nuclear is bad, it makes NUCLEAR WASTE
>Coal generates far more waste and increases smog and CO2 levels int he air
>That's perfectly fine
>Nuclear creates a relatively small amount of waste and doesn't add CO2 or smog
>IT'S LE BAD AND EVIL

>They are trying to produce something productive
You mean they are trying to scam retards. Anyone with a basic understanding of thermodynamics should be able to explain why solar roadways are retarded.

There is a good reason.
The government has done many completly retarded things with nuclear energy before the anti nuclear movement, and would otherwise still be doing them.
It's a quality control check really

Republicans do the same thing. Their cronies are just in the defense industry ($300M to kill 30 faggots in a hole, seriously)

Yes it is. If you lay a solar panel flat on the ground it can't generate nearly as much energy compared to facing it TOWARDS THE FUCKING SUN

There is a difference between funding nuclear energy and wanting 2 more bombs dropped on japan.

Nuclear power is dead. Don't fall for memes.

Yeah, they probably said something like that about humans flying too.
It's unimportant and it isn't completely fucking evil like the imporant things nanny state protects are.
Seems good to me.

If you run out of roof space, you don't have a choice unless you want to fuck up your lawn.

>facing it TOWARDS THE FUCKING SUN

Driveways face upward
Toward the sky
Where, you know, the sun is

>inb4 Lambert's cosine law

>Humans flying too
Except there is basic math and science explaining why Solar roadways wont ever work.
The low efficiency of putting it flat on the ground doesn't justify it's cost. Either put it on your roof, put it on a platform but never put it flat on the ground.

>
They're more efficient if they're angled.

Watch Op's video. They are basically useless unless angled.

>The low efficiency of putting it flat on the ground doesn't justify it's cost

So you only generate 1/3, big deal. Still worth it if you're in need of off the grid juice.

>Big deal
Watch the video idiot. It generates less than 10 cents of energy a day.
Why would you spend 20k on something that will make you 10 cents a day in return? Stop shilling for this shitty idea.

I'm all for Solar Energy, but this is ridiculous!

>Watch the video idiot. It generates less than 10 cents of energy a day.

Because many of the panels were broken.

>tomahawk missiles launched into some syrian dirt
>59 x 1.4 million
TOUGH ON TERROR! The silent majority stands with TRUMP!

>How can I trick the US or German Government into giving me money for free?
Use the words "green" and "carbon" a lot.

No, even then it was trash.

If a patch like that is generating 10 cents worth of electricity per day, the panels were not built/designed properly.

what's with the solar roadways peoples fascination with installing inefficient solar panels? everytime these are criticized for not being efficient they say it's not the point

Nope, the introduced inefficiencies are because of suboptimal positioning and all of the crap you have to do to them to make them a useable surface.

>Idiots not understanding research
That's the whole point of it: Investing in innovations which may or may not have a decent ROI

>Anyone with a basic understanding of thermodynamics should be able to explain why solar roadways are retarded.
I don't have a basic understanding of thermodynamics, please explain it to me

Current nuclear energy tech isn't sufficient and needs to be devolped
Congress and exucutive agencies are literally too stupid to have the responsibility of nuclear energy r&d.
It needs to be done but not without civic reform

So what amazing new technology is being researched here? These are inefficient solar panels on the ground.

Like fucking what? How could any of that be worse, or less useful than how they're blowing away boatloads of money with military research anyway? I'm not saying that DARPA hasn't made some cool shit, because it has. All I'm saying is that we should have two competing ways of blowing away two boatloads of money, with one of them being NUCLEAR RESEARCH.

The point of research isn't to throw resources away on "innovations" that are in no way innovations and we already know for a fact cannot work. I suppose you'd be in favor of feeding cancer patients a half pound of arsenic because it "might" cure cancer because that's the exact same kind of wankery that this is. It's not trying out some new concept, new materials, or new process. It's putting things together in a stupid way that we know can't work.

2 of trump's syrian tomahawks cost more than this whole project but they don't care about that. It's obviously another /pol/bait thread, and full of their ilk. Reply if you must, but remember to sage.

?
Democrats intend to kill you long before any of your great grand children are around
Democrats are the party of white genocide.

>These shills

>10 cents of electricity a day
Do you not get the inherent flaw with using capital to value things?
Compared to what? The relative monetary value of natural gas fired power plants?
Money is only worth what was done to get it and holds no real world value. The practice of using monetary value and disregarding the ends and means is culturally aquired sociopathy.
Stop shilling for moral degeneracy

>So what amazing new technology is being researched here? These are inefficient solar panels on the ground.
How come you know beforehand that they are inefficient?

You know that calling someone a shill is not an argument, right?

Neither is bringing up unrelated politics.

300M was the cost of development, one bomb itself just costs 170,000.

I think the amount of money spent on the military industrial complex is dumb but let's not throw around incorrect stats.

>How come you know beforehand that they are inefficient?
They have to be covered up with a airfield surface to make them safe to drive on, this stops a lot of light from coming in.

Why not just put them next to the road?

>How come you know beforehand that they are inefficient?
Because we've researched the fuck out the very type of solar panels that are being used. These aren't magic fairy dust pV cells. We are /very/ familiar with what conditions these things work well in and which ones they work very poorly in. The only difference between these and the ones you are used to seeing is how they are housed because solar panels are generally very brittle so they have to be strengthened.

Like I said here I am in favor of nuclear r&d I just don't want illiterate people making the decisions.
That's how we got all of our previous catastrophes.
Your picture concerns me.
Where does the thermal pollution go?
The ocean?
That's an ecological disaster right there

2 million dollars is fucking fractions of pennies to the government, get some sense.

a waste is a waste

this isn't research, this is engineering

giving the solar roadways people money is like hiring an engineer to design a bridge for you because you think his design for a house made of canned cheese spread shows some interesting promise

capital is physical goods, not money

Fine, solar roadways will have a much lower output of clean energy than dost panels installed in a non-retarded fashion.

Clean energy being the entire point.

It's the new religion of the left: I call it green environmentalism. It's entirely fact free, and highly resistant to reasoned arguments to the contrary. That's more or less the clinical definition of delusion.

PS: This is distinct from being concerned about global warming. However, the proper response to fixing global warming is nuclear power, none of this bullshit solar and wind nonsense.

>Clean energy being the entire point.
EXCEPT IT'S NOT. You're replacing a road surface that can be made with recycled materials with something that can't be dwarfing regular asphalt or concrete's cost and carbon footprint while taking money away from fucking viable solutions for creating cleaner energy.

Fuck me people like you are dense. I bet you think that fucking requiring "clean diesel" is a good thing too.

>Current nuclear energy tech isn't sufficient and needs to be devolped
Wrong.

euanmearns.com/nuclear-capital-costs-three-mile-island-and-chernobyl/

It's quite fine right now. Next-gen are even better though.

>That's how we got all of our previous catastrophes.
Which killed less than 4000 people. exclude Chernobyl, and we're down to double or single digits. A single actual historical dam accident killed 10,000 +. Perspective.

do you stop and pick up pennies if you see them? a waste is only a waste if the thing you're throwing out has a value.

I wasn't even considering human deaths, just earth system consequences, which are severe and lasting.
The thermal pollution from Diablo canyon from example.
Chernobyl is still uninhabitable.
The ecological consequences of dams are comparable

There's a difference between throwing out something without value and throwing money that could be put to better use at something with no value.

except it couldn't because that wasn't what it was approved for and allocated to.

the money may as well not even have existed until it was given the purpose of building the solar roadway.

Then you know what I meant.
I still don't see the harm

The money most definitely existed and was diverted from other uses to do this.

You're more than kinda dumb.

I agree.
If we want to survive, Roads should be removed on a massive scale to restore landscape connectivity. People shouldn't use so much energy and personal automobiles are obsolete and need to go and would have went already if it wasn't for the nanny state protecting corporate interests

...wha-huh?

The US chamber of commerce and other industry backed think tanks and front groups lobby for state intervention in the economy to keep innovation like mass transit, high speed rail, and decent infrastructure out of the market in order to hold onto their power. Like why leaded gasoline was used over ethanol forever despite the far superior advantages of ethanol.
Loss of biodiversty and ecological connectivity are as great of a threat as climate change but get talked about even less, because the media is also corporate controlled.

wrong, let me know when you learn the basics of how the government and our funding works. fucking pajeet.

Oh, so the various levels of government don't have a fucking income base that they supplement via grants from higher levels of government and/or things like new taxes, the selling of bonds, and loans? You know, just fucking shifting money that already exists around? That money was allocated for this project does not imply it was "created" at the point of allocation nor does it somehow deny that the money could not have been put to another use. True enough after it was allocated, it's extraordinarily difficult and in some cases impossible to re-allocate it for a different purpose; however that's not the same thing as "durr, de monies were der before dey's allocated".

>2 million is peanuts. Risk vs reward.
This.

The Solar Roadways people are obviously lacking in competence, with their glass-topped box approach. But this token investment given to even a poor approach will attract effort toward more durable solar cell packaging.

There are already much better solar road cells: not thick glass-topped boxes, but thin, somewhat-flexible sheets to be glued down on new roads.

This kind of development effort will lead to things like tough all-solar roofs that can be walked on for maintenance without concern.

Lmao that doesn't even make sense

The fuck? This isn't spurring or funding any research that wasn't already happening. It just gave one retarded company that's doing basically nothing a bunch of money.

wrong
now innovative people and companies know they have chance at receiving money and they're motivated.

next?

they are motivated to invest in lobby

Holy shit, they knew that already. Solar is one of the heaviest subsided industries in the world. If you've got a solar panel business or are researching solar power and can't get funding you are the least qualified person on the planet for any job.

Say you're a 10 year old trans gay refugee

solarroadways.com/Research/Research

*companies owned by family and close friends of government officials

>This isn't spurring
And how would you know that?

The significant thing about this team is that they were ready to go ahead and install real hardware in a public place. Funding it sends a message that developing deployable hardware will be rewarded.

The trouble with academics is that they're entirely willing to gobble up research funding without ever producing any practical results. The trouble with businesses is that, if possible, they'll soak up subsidies without doing anything new. Sometimes you have to fund something odd and seemingly impractical to make a point. In this case, the point is: "At least these jokers are doing something new that works in the real world, and no matter how clownish or inefficient they seem, they're better than any of the rest of you in that way."

>the average person is a retard
>people fall for le common man memes and vote for people like them (ie retards)
>the government ends up run by retards

>solar is one of the most heavily subsidized industries
Do you belive that?
It isn't even close to the subsides given for oil and gas pipelines.
Ffs the nanny state is why solar energy is non-competitive compared to fossil fuels.
The state literally suppresses the market for alternative energy so their FF constituents can keep making money.

You know what this is spurring? Other con artists to make something shitty that is provably not going to work to get a big wad of cash. Hell, let's throw a few million at one of those 300 mpg carburetors and a few more at a perpetual motion machine.

This shit isn't enlivening research, it's not spurring anyone to move in any directions that were not being moved in before. It's just taking money away from researchers who are working on viable solutions. It tells people that "fuck working on something that'll actually work, what you need is to be sparkly and attention getting if you want money".

I can definitely tell that you have done zero work in alternative power generation and I'm starting to suspect that you're terminally naive.

Because the technology is probably possible with the right research. Also thunderfoots debunking videos are unbearably cynical but actually point out most of the pitfalls we would have to overcome. I'm not saying however that the technology is worth actually putting in the ground however.

Oh, you're an idiot who doesn't know shit about energy. Gotcha. I'm done here.

Obama threw billions of dollars at companies that said that they were green, or were developing green technology.

Why tho?

>Except there is basic math and science explaining why Solar roadways wont ever work.
An experiment is worth more.

I guess you read that retarded German paper and now your an expert? Get ready to suck Apollos glorious solar cock you combustion loving dandy.

Ha.
That's just wrong, he did next to nothing for clean energy. He was Ronald Reagan the second.
subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/top-100-parents

>It isn't even close to the subsides given for oil and gas pipelines.
subsidies per unit of energy provided are several times higher for solar than they are for fossil fuels
instituteforenergyresearch.org/studies/energy-subsidies-study/

what is the static universe and 100,000 other things people thought were "basic math and science"

Why does a company called clean coal power solutions get $550,000,000/year, a comparative drop in an ocean compared to the subsidies the fossil fuels and automotive industry get in total?
Do you have any idea about energy subsides? These are facts I'm telling you.

NUCLEAR POWER!!!
NUCLEAR POWER!!!
NUCLEAR POWER!!!

ONLY NUCLEAR POWER IS ANY GOOD THIS SUN BULLSHIT IS BALLS OUT JEW MEMES AIN'T NOTHING GOOD COMMIN FROM THE SUN NUCLEAR IS BETTER THAN ANY OTHER POWER AT ALL DON'T EVEN DOUBT

Because I don't have the time or energy to discuss with you how all of the political left bullshit conspiracies about Big Oil (protip: Big Oil is one of the biggest researchers in alternative energy: they're companies looking to be around for a long time making money for a long time and they know oil will end. They are trying to position themselves to be able to take advantage of whatever comes after) and Big Government keeping down alternative energy.

There's a running asston of problems with practically any alternative you care to name that makes it impossible to deploy in a large scale and that's without addressing the elephant in the room of energy storage (specifically the damage wrought by getting the materials for batteries and disposing of batteries, but that's slowly getting better), and I'm not talking about little "we can figure it out pretty soon", I'm talking huge fucking fatal issues to the ideas. There is no current nor near term replacement for fossil fuels. The technologies just are not there yet and it has nothing to do with suppression. We throw tons of money at amazing minds trying to figure this shit out but we're still talking at least a century before viable solutions for a first world nation.

We are on the clock and we don't have unlimited resources on any side of this, so it is a fucking travesty to waste money on bullshit like this. It's literally on the same goddamn level as sending a few million to research homeopathic treatments for cancer.

>Why does a company called clean coal power solutions
no such company exists
source: google

nice try Myron ebell.
>per unit of energy provided.
Literally what I am saying, fossil fuels subsides are to keep alternative energy supressed in the market by allowing oil and gas to be produced for much less with the help of our tax dollars.

>Myron ebell.
who?
>Literally what I am saying, fossil fuels subsides are to keep alternative energy supressed in the market by allowing oil and gas to be produced for much less with the help of our tax dollars.
you do not understand what "per unit of energy" means.
>EIA data shows that solar energy was subsidized at $24.34 per megawatt hour and wind at $23.37 per megawatt hour for electricity generated in 2007. By contrast, coal received 44 cents, natural gas and petroleum received 25 cents, hydroelectric power 67 cents, and nuclear power $1.59 per megawatt hour.

Clean coal power operations
It was all in one subsidy from good ol Kentucky too

>nuclear power $1.59 per megawatt hour.
Fucking someone needs to break GE's monopoly on nuke.

>electricity generated in 2007
>2007
you fucking what mate

>the elephant in the room of energy storage
Ultracapacitors and flywheels for the grid and lead acid batteries for home use.
>impossible to deploy in a large scale
The grid may die and be replaced by local systems.