I’m all for putting solar panels all over the place, but won’t these get dusty and oily and need loads of cleaning after trains pass over?

Also, costing €623,000 over three years sounds rather expensive for just 100m (although that roughly equates to 11KW).

  • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    have we run out of convenient places to put panels? that’s news to me, last i checked we still had a hilarious amount of free roof space and stuff like parking lots where we can just slap up the panels.

    • qupada@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 minutes ago

      Putting a solar roofs over any open-air carpark you happen to own is just a hilariously easier option. Hell, you could erect these OVER the train tracks.

      https://greenox-group.de/photovoltaik-carport/ (Article is in German, but it’s really more around the picture)

      According to a completely un-sourced picture I found online, one carpark (in the USA) is typically around 5.5 x 2.6m, so if you had even 50 carparks on your site you could have ~715 square metres of panels. More, if you figure a way to cover the aisles between the rows of carparks too.

      At the top end of all applicable figures (panel efficiency, solar irradiance, inverter efficiency), that could net you ~160kW at solar midday.

      Now on the other side, standard-gauge railway is around 1.4m wide, and maybe you could cram a 1m width of panels between the rails.

      That sounds like a lot - 1000 square metres per kilometre, and there are thousands of kilometres of railway lines out there - but it’s harder to install, harder to service, gets dirty faster, is liable to get damaged, and now you have to figure out how to extract power from somehing a kilometre long, instead of an area that could be a square only around 35m (~115’) on a side (for the above 50 carparks).

      I know which one of those I’d want to run the cables for.

      As has been pointed out many times when this dumb-ass idea comes up, only once you’ve exhausted every other possibility (carparks, rooftops, putting panels ABOVE roads/rivers/canals/cycleways/railways) and have literally no other viable installation locations, then we can talk.

  • cron@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Why not on the sides of the railroad? Often, there is significant free space on both sides of the track.

    • CouncilOfFriends@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      I was about to comment that it makes more sense to put panels in open space, but looking into it does appear some numbers crunchers did the math on efficiency gains from being able to swap old panels with a dedicated machine on the rails, versus the other option.

  • Dippy@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Trains drop metal bits pretty often too. A lot of these panels will get shattered

  • ben_dover@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    you have to keep the panels clean in order to work. this is not a great position to do so

  • Hirom@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    13 hours ago

    It seems like it a bad place. It would probably shorten the panels’ lifetime, and maintenance would be tricky without interrupting train traffic.

    Let’s work on putting more solar panels on schools, malls, parking lots, train stations, and any structure with a large roof.

  • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    The 600000 € probably include the development cost. Thus, on a larger scale, the cost per unit length will decrease significantly.

      • DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        That’s like 1/7th of the cost of a single passenger car. I’m sure they can easily afford to take that hit if it doesn’t end up panning out.

  • zante@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    It’s free real estate and incredibly efficient use of space. If it works, with all the challenges other have outlined - even at a reduced yield - it’ll still pay off.