Here Come the Solar-Powered Cars (theguardian.com) 102
The Guardian reports on the "world's first production-ready solar car", a streamlined and energy-efficient sedan-style vehicle covered with curved solar panels called "the Lightyear 0."
The Dutch company Lightyear hopes to be shipping the vehicle by November, priced at about $264,000 (€250,000 or £215,000) — though the company plans another solar-assisted car priced at $32,000 (€30,000) as early as 2025.
Lead engineer Roel Grooten credits their car's efficiency to things like the "low-rolling resistance of the tyres, of the bearing s and the motor." It is this streamlined design that the company credits for allowing it to muscle its way into a space long overlooked by most car manufacturers...."If we would have the same amount of energy that we harvest on these panels on any other car that uses three times the amount of energy to drive, it becomes useless. It becomes a very expensive gimmick," said Grooten. "You have to build this car from the ground up, to make it as efficient as possible, to make it this feasible."
In optimal conditions, the solar panels can add up to 44 miles a day to the 388-mile range the car gets between charges, according to the company. Tests carried out by Lightyear suggest people with a daily commute of less than 22 miles could drive for two months in the Netherlands without needing to plug in, while those in sunnier climes such as Portugal or Spain could go as long as seven months....
In an effort to use as much of this solar energy as possible, the windswept design eschews side-view mirrors for cameras and runs off lightweight electric motors tucked into its wheels. The body panels are crafted from reclaimed carbon fibre and the interiors are fashioned from vegan, plant-based leather with fabrics made from recycled polyethylene terephthalate bottles.
The article notes that Mercedes-Benz also plans rooftop solar panels for an upcoming electric car, while Toyota's Prius hybrids also sometimes offer limited-capacity panels as add-ons. Other companies planning solar-assisted vehicles include Sono Motors and Aptera Motors.
The Dutch company Lightyear hopes to be shipping the vehicle by November, priced at about $264,000 (€250,000 or £215,000) — though the company plans another solar-assisted car priced at $32,000 (€30,000) as early as 2025.
Lead engineer Roel Grooten credits their car's efficiency to things like the "low-rolling resistance of the tyres, of the bearing s and the motor." It is this streamlined design that the company credits for allowing it to muscle its way into a space long overlooked by most car manufacturers...."If we would have the same amount of energy that we harvest on these panels on any other car that uses three times the amount of energy to drive, it becomes useless. It becomes a very expensive gimmick," said Grooten. "You have to build this car from the ground up, to make it as efficient as possible, to make it this feasible."
In optimal conditions, the solar panels can add up to 44 miles a day to the 388-mile range the car gets between charges, according to the company. Tests carried out by Lightyear suggest people with a daily commute of less than 22 miles could drive for two months in the Netherlands without needing to plug in, while those in sunnier climes such as Portugal or Spain could go as long as seven months....
In an effort to use as much of this solar energy as possible, the windswept design eschews side-view mirrors for cameras and runs off lightweight electric motors tucked into its wheels. The body panels are crafted from reclaimed carbon fibre and the interiors are fashioned from vegan, plant-based leather with fabrics made from recycled polyethylene terephthalate bottles.
The article notes that Mercedes-Benz also plans rooftop solar panels for an upcoming electric car, while Toyota's Prius hybrids also sometimes offer limited-capacity panels as add-ons. Other companies planning solar-assisted vehicles include Sono Motors and Aptera Motors.
Re: (Score:2)
Anything substantial or should we just accept your word as gospel?
Re:Another scam (Score:4, Informative)
An analysis [youtube.com] of the marketing claims by a EE.
So very expensive, physically incapable of meeting the hype.
Re: Another scam (Score:2)
Oversold, but not quite a scam (Score:1)
I stopped watching because that guy is using a lot of words to basically say they're overselling. Which ought to be fairly obvious given the pv area and efficiencies involved.
As to the hype, well, they gotta sell it somehow, and they're not lying so much as carefully pussyfooting around the weak range numbers. It looks like a great toy if you have the money to spare and a 50km commute. Plenty of people have short commutes, so it might just work. Just don't expect to take the thing out on a long road trip o
Re: (Score:1)
Well, I for one find that my scam of a small sat antenna that I paid $500 for is working rather well to deliver 200Mbps+ internet speeds to a location where my only other options were severely limited LTE or 3Mbps DSL.
Re: (Score:1)
And Spacex is doing rather well, even in the unlikley event they don't get people to Mars.
Elon Musk can be a total dick. But he is also a genius who is making the world a better place a million times faster than you are.
Suck on that.
Re: (Score:3)
I understand marketing. Marketing will always present you with the absolute best case every time. This to me was over the line. Had you kept listening, you would have seen his calculations for a very generous best case, better than physics has on offer (365 clear summer days a year, sun always at the optimal angle, best cells on the market) and the numbers still come up short. That's fine for something from the dollar store, but this is certainly not a bargain basement car.
I would like for something like th
Re: (Score:3)
I understand marketing. Marketing will always present you with the absolute best case every time. This to me was over the line. Had you kept listening, you would have seen his calculations for a very generous best case, better than physics has on offer (365 clear summer days a year, sun always at the optimal angle, best cells on the market) and the numbers still come up short. That's fine for something from the dollar store, but this is certainly not a bargain basement car.
He also says "If you're rich then why not?"
Some people will buy this just as a status symbol. They're the target demographic, not you.
Re: (Score:3)
It's the old tech adoption curve, which goes something like this (1) tech enthusiasts, (2) early adopters (3) pragmatists, (4) conservatives, (5) tech reactionaries. This is how you market to tech enthusiasts.
Tech enthusiasts buy into something before it really works. You may think that's stupid; but tech enthusiasm plays a vital role in bringing any new technology to market. You ultimately make the bulk of your money with pragmatists, but they won't buy until the early adopters show it's safe, and the e
Re: (Score:3)
Since the main argument that this is a scam is actually dispelled right in the summary also makes the linked video kind of pointless.
It is only a scam if you believe that the car is going to run purely on solar energy generated by the car's own PV array. The summary clearly states the limitations of the solar array:
In optimal conditions, the solar panels can add up to 44 miles a day to the 388-mile range the car gets between charges,
It is rather hard to say that they are trying to scam you if they point out the limitations right in the summary.
If you still think that the car can be driven purely on its own solar power than y
Re: (Score:2)
Scam would be a bit too strong of a word here since there is no doubt that it has solar panels and presumably they do contribute charge.
The marketing is a bit scuzzy since the figures they present are in no way possible to attain even in perfect conditions. I could understand marketing presenting the best possible figures, that's what marketing does, but they went past that. That's what the video is pointing out. Some people would classify marketing that makes claims that are beyond what is possible even in
Re: (Score:2)
An analysis [youtube.com] of the marketing claims by a EE.
I respect the fellow Australian EE a lot, but Australia treats its cars the same was America does. Driving habits are absolutely nothing like they are in the Netherlands or much of Europe, and while this would be absolutely pointless for the vast majority of Americans or Australia's it none the less makes perfect sense for many people.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure a difference in driving style would account for that large of a shortfall in the numbers. OTOH, if you mean shorter driving distances make the shorter range more practical, then yes that would be a big factor but still doesn't excuse marketing claims that can't actually be met even under ideal circumstances.
Re: (Score:2)
An analysis [youtube.com] of the marketing claims by a EE.
So very expensive, physically incapable of meeting the hype.
Umm. That same EE did a video about the Aptera that was full of inaccuracies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Aptera is not claiming solar charging will produce full range in a day. The current claim is about 30 miles a day or 11,000 miles a year, with possible peak charging under perfect no obstructions, cloudless day, of up to 40 miles per day if the purchaser orders the optional solar roof.
We all just have to wait to see what independent reviews all these various vehicles receive when they are actually p
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I just watched him talk about the Aptera. In what way was he inaccurate? He took the figures right off of Aptera's website and datasheet. He didn't call them out because their advertised capabilities are more inline with the laws of physics. He did point out downsides that, naturally, marketing did not but he was fair about it.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I just watched him talk about the Aptera. In what way was he inaccurate? He took the figures right off of Aptera's website and datasheet. He didn't call them out because their advertised capabilities are more inline with the laws of physics. He did point out downsides that, naturally, marketing did not but he was fair about it.
There are plenty of corrections in the comment section below that video.
Though, as I previously said, without independent 3rd party analysis it is hard to discern what is accurate in any pre-released product.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it a "Scam"?
It works, it gives you free miles. If you're rich and turn up at meetings in one of these then it sends the intended signals. How is that a scam?
Re: (Score:1)
I asked for something to back up your claim, not more hyperbole.
sjames, unlike you, provided an analysis why it's a scam. You don't provide anything substantial. Ever. You have claims, accusations, insults and other petty trolling. Nothing else.
You're one of those people that won't leave a void when they die. Because nothing of value will be lost.
Re: (Score:2)
No-one has any idea yet where this idea will end up.
"in practice it’s really sort of bull shit" (Score:2)
> Sure, you can get “up to 100 percent” of your mileage via solar energy if you only drive five miles a month
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/25/keeps-going-driving-first-production-ready-solar-car-lightyear-0
Tokyo got more solar power than expected (Score:2)
If you have to feed the trolls, can't you at least change the vacuous Subject?
New Subject is from yesterday's news in Tokyo. Actually helped to keep the capacity margin bigger than expected.
Re: (Score:1)
I refuse to put more effort into the post than him.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm... Well I agree with your sentiment. So how about a simple NAK for the body and put your limited effort into neutering the troll's Subject?
There must be a joke in here somewhere about the troll Subject that propagated forever... There's a song about something that went on forever?
Re: (Score:2)
Fox makes plenty of money and does not need to resort for pushing scams in exchange for cash
Tell that to the MyPillow guy or Balance of Nature or Focus Factor or.... that Tucker likes to promote.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The real kicker however is that they claim a power consumption of around 100 Wh / km, owing to aerodynamic design, an unusually light vehicle, and a very efficient direct drive train. That is huge. Most EVs use around 150 Wh / km. The car would get very good range from a relatively small battery as a result. Personally, this is the claim I
Re: (Score:2)
Fitting name (Score:1, Troll)
Lightyear 0 - because it takes one year worth of sunlight to get more than 0 miles of range.
Re: (Score:3)
In this case it doesn't matter much because the distance is 0, and this is how far you are going to go, in one minute, one month, one year, whatever....
Super Expensive (Score:4, Insightful)
At that price how many years would it take to pay back not having to plug in over even a nominally expensive electric car?
An impressive engineering feat, and I'm sure it will get cheaper over time... but how much cheaper I wonder, and I also wonder with lightweight everything how practical it will be as a car.
Re: (Score:2)
That was my thought, interesting but shockingly expensive. I would only need to charge on days I did driving other than commuting.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it does not pay back, they just want to market a first product to reassure their investors so they can work on the version 2 that will be reasonably priced (30 k€, same price as the competing EV in the EU market). If you check their website, they don't say it will say you money, they say you will be independent from the grid. They can convince people who live in dense cities (without garage, parking in the street) and complain that the government want to force everyone to buy EV but there are n
Re: (Score:2)
At that price how many years would it take to pay back not having to plug in over even a nominally expensive electric car?
Longer than the useful lifetime of the car, I'm sure... but then you could make a similar argument for other completely unnecessary (but cool) features of expensive cars, e.g. "for the price of a Bugatti, how many years would the benefit of going 300MPH take to pay back over going slower in even a nominally expensive sports car"? Nobody ever accused niche car purchasers of being economic rationalists, and that's fine, otherwise we'd all be driving Priuses :)
An impressive engineering feat, and I'm sure it will get cheaper over time... but how much cheaper I wonder, and I also wonder with lightweight everything how practical it will be as a car.
We can always look at the asymptotic best-case s
Not even just UV damage... (Score:1)
a lot of people would prefer to avoid unnecessary UV damage to their expensive investment.
That's partly true but also there's hail and dust and rain you want to keep off a car if possible as well... and it would be a pain to bring a car in and out of a garage every night, in most places you don't want to leave a car out overnight for risk of theft or other damage.
So yeah although I like the idea of being totally free of reliance on the grid... I do like the idea of solar panels on an RV roof, that makes a t
Re: (Score:2)
An IBM S/360 went for $253,000 in 1969. Plug that into the inflation calculator and it works out to $2,000,000. So yes the classic Simpsons quote is correct. In the future only the five richest kings of Europe will be able to afford computers.
That's just one issue though (Score:1)
I even admitted in my original post the cost would probably come down. But what of the more fundamental flaw of have a car where every gram of weight is shaved, how practical of a car is that you own and use? Will a cheap version of that be more like a two-seater sports car, or a station wagon?
Re: (Score:2)
At that price how many years would it take to pay back not having to plug in over even a nominally expensive electric car?
The target demographic doesn't care.
Dave Jones nails it (Score:4, Informative)
This video covers it all [youtube.com] Dave Jones, EEVBlog
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. I watched his video a couple of days ago, and he got some fair points but he's also being overly negative in my view. Of course he's right that marketing stretches the numbers, the concept in itself is still nice, and there's no reason not to put solar panels on a car, apart the question if it's cost effective.
Basically, the simple conclusion to draw from that video is that Dave is not the target audience. Of course there's an early adapter premium. But then there's also people with plenty money
Re: (Score:3)
The whole car looks like a scam so it makes sense that the solar stuff does too. Like he said, he can't keep his EV fully charged with a massive rooftop solar installation during regular commuting, there's no way plastering some panels would do much more than a few extra miles in that pig of a car. Not to mention the cool quarter million bucks it would cost you.
The Aptera is the only one that I think has a real chance of being somewhat useful due to its much higher efficiency and proportionally large surfac
Re: (Score:2)
The Aptera has much higher efficiency because it's a fragile insect with a crucial flaw, a wheel in the wrong place that makes it much more difficult to dodge holes and debris. But it also has a teeny tiny little roof, so in addition to being a ping-pong ball on the road of life, it really has no substantial room for a panel.
Re: Dave Jones nails it (Score:1)
Re:Doxing asshat nails it (Score:2)
They have also compromised the design of the car to make it more efficient. It's very low, so will be awkward to get in and out of.
Makes more sense to put the solar panels on the roof of a building. Then you can park in shade and avoid using the air conditioning, while also getting charged.
Re: Dave Jones nails it (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, electric cars make no sense at all.
we should all be driving nuclear powered cars - after all, if you are getting less than 5000 miles per refuelling, it's just not practical.
Re: (Score:2)
This video covers it all [youtube.com] Dave Jones, EEVBlog
No. This video covers it from an Australia (similar to an American) perspective on vehicle use. I respect Dave Jones a lot, but as a fellow Australian EE I know he has zero clue as to how many other people in the world use cars.
Re: (Score:2)
The longest-running continuous civilisation of the Aboriginal peoples were compatible, but they fell victim to a genocide, more or less.
Re: (Score:1)
That video is a trainwreck. Skip to 22:00 to hear the summary instead of the clickbait. "So the claims they are making aren't bullshit." He does some basic math.
He compares his Hyundai 'I've gotten this much around town' with the whole range claim of lightyear. Whole range to range, the lightyear is twice as efficient. Then he keeps shouting about his 8kw home system not providing enough, while also mentioning that only the 'leftover' from it is going to his car. He goes on to say that cars *should* hav
Best application ... (Score:2)
I think this has already been done.
Re: (Score:1)
I have seen this feature mentioned before (apparently they sold devices that you could add to your sunroof that did this and they lowered the temperature of the car by 30-40 degrees (still over 100 but not an oven.)
Re:Best application ... (Score:4, Insightful)
But if you didn't have to park your car in the sun to get the solar power it probably wouldn't get nearly as hot inside so it wouldn't need the fans :-)
Sounds like a catch22 to me.
Re: (Score:2)
VAG has done it on a whole bunch of vehicles. ISTR it being on some BMWs too. I had it on an Audi A8. It was really dumb and had no clue about temperature or humidity, but it sure was nice on a hot day. You could add it to anything fairly easily if you could get decent adhesive solar panels.
Re: (Score:2)
I have one of those on my 10 years old Prius. It came with the sun roof (sun roof in the front, and over the backseats there solar panels powering the fan). Most likely I'll get a new car somewhere next year. The fan running on the solar panels is the feature I will miss the most. The more sunlight, the harder the fan works. It is not an air conditioning so when it gets really hot, the car still gets hot only never unbearable hot. They discontinued this fairly quick. My guess is that people expected too muc
Re: (Score:2)
$264,000 for 22 miles per day extra? (Score:4, Informative)
The article mentions a hypothetical 22 mile round trip in the Netherlands.
The cost per mile for electric cars works out at about $0.03/mile. So 22 miles would normally cost $0.66/day, or $241 per year. You can buy a good electric car for $50,000. ($264,000 - $50,000) / $241 = 887 years before your solar panels pay for themselves.
The target market for this car seems to be rich lunatics who can't do basic math.
Re: $264,000 for 22 miles per day extra? (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s a first version. The rich lunatics are paying to help their fellow man obtain a more affordable car in the future, and virtue signaling.
Re: (Score:2)
The rich lunatics could install solar panels on their roofs and still come out ahead, with equivalent claim to virtue signaling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Should include a solar input. (Score:1)
That way you could have a small set of panels at home to increase that 44 miles.
And you could put a few panels in the trunk to set up at the beach or campsite to increase that range.
I bet 5 panels could add 60 miles from what I've read on other vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
I met someone once who was converting a VW camper van to electric, and planning to power it with solar panels. I asked her how long she'd have to sit to drive 100 km. She figured about a week. She didn't care, the point was to live in the thing and meander her way around the continent.
This sounds like a very expensive way to do that. And not much space for sleeping either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Plus you also have to include having power when the power system goes down. Especially during really cold or really hot weather.
Let's look at the performance stats (Score:2)
Lightyear 0
0-60 10 seconds
Top speed 99 mph
Price $264,000
Tesla Model S Plaid
0-60 1.99 seconds
Top speed 200 mph
Price $130,000
But wait! According to their website:
Sustainable design is stitched into every seam of Lightyear 0. The car’s high-quality interior is crafted from plant-based leather, recycled PET bottle fabrics and sustainably restructured rattan palm, breathing new life into a conscious collection of all-natural materials.
Take my money already!
https://lightyear.one/lightyea... [lightyear.one]
Re: (Score:2)
There are only a few places in the world where it's legal to drive 200 mph, and I bet that chews up the tires pretty fast. 99 mph top speed is fine for almost everybody. That said, 0-60 in 10s is pathetic for an EV, especially at that price tag. How did they screw that up?
Re: Let's look at the performance stats (Score:1)
GM SunRaycer? (Score:3)
The last time I've seen a car that truly was solar powered was the GM Sunraycer, which was engineered to be as lightweight as possible, with the main electric motor the size of a coffee can.
With 500-1000 watts maximum that can come from a car, how is that going to make that much of a dent, when a car burns a good amount of electricity per kilometer? At most, one may get 5-15 km of range from a good day.
I can see this combined with some type of custom carport. A carport full of bifacial panels (bifacial will allow the panels to pick up light from underneath, as well as better morning/evening sun gathering) might be doable, but at most, that might get one 100-200 km a day. However, it is better than nothing, and if one's commute is fairly short, it is a net gain.
Re: (Score:2)
with the main electric motor the size of a coffee can.
African or American?
With 500-1000 watts maximum that can come from a car, how is that going to make that much of a dent
It won't. It will trickle charge if you rarely use it, but mostly it will run the hvac.
Re: (Score:1)
The GM Sunraycer was only the winner of the 1st World Solar Challenge in 1987, but there's have been 100's of cars built like it for solar challenges around the world since then, including 16 different ones built just by my alma mater, the University of Michigan. Many have competed in the 15 World Solar Challenges that have happened since that 1st one, as well as multiple American, South African, and European Solar Challenges, among quite a few others.
Keep in mind, all of these cars, including Sunraycer, a
Aptera is $26k (Score:2)
The Aptera Motors car mentioned later in the summery is going to start at $25,900 U.S. It's a cool looking vehicle, super efficient, and even fast.
This will eventually work... (Score:1)
It appeals to some, and that is all it needs right now. Obviously the price puts it out of the range of most everybody, but the point of starting manufacturing is to work on bringing the price point down. For this vehicle, it isn't so much the battery & motor, it is the reduction of structure and operating energy costs around the electrical system. Try sending this through a crash test, or a full OEM durability test.
Consider that many plug-in hybrids to 20-40 miles before they switch to gas power, th
I look forward to getting an Aptera (Score:2)
The Aptera looks like a lot of fun. I'll get the base model... it's self charging might be 15-20 miles per weekday, but that is about all I expect to use it for. Not a big deal if I need to plug it in to add range for a longer trip; the 100Wh/mile (or so) efficiency really makes it interesting.
Plus, hey... who DOESN'T want to drive a freak-mobile every so often?!
Re: (Score:2)
As other posters have said, plenty of rich jerks already pay a quarter-million (or more) for a car. If automotive marketing has taught us anything over the last 100 years, it's that many car buyers are *not* making rational purchases. One doesn't buy a Bugatti Veyron because one expects to commute at 400km/h. On a more prosaic note, many people buy an SUV when a station wagon, or even a hatchback, would serve their needs just as well. On a "greener" note, look how many people bought a Prius 20 years ago, wh
Re: (Score:1)
and this car *needs* to be parked outdoors so it will charge! So the virtue-signalling will be more efficient!
What will all that sun do to the car's interior and tires? Maybe they have this figured out but I would not be surprised that in a few years these cars will have turned to shit because they used all new materials that haven't had long term testing in the sun.
Then again, this is a car that cost $250k, so the chances this will be parked out in the sun for long periods may be quite small. It is the idea of a solar powered car that is being sold, the probability of any of them actually being powered by the su
Re: (Score:2)
I think car window glass blocks a lot of degrading UV light. My 1990 hatchback has vinyl trim and cloth seats, and, since I bought it second hand in 2000, has spent most of its time parked outdoors. None of the trim looks "new," but neither has the vinyl cracked, or cloth trim gone threadbare or crumbly.
I park in a garage (Score:1)
And while at work, the parking is currently uncovered, they'll probably put solar panels over it at some point.
Camping car with solar panel (Score:2)
Million dollar mileage (Score:2)
>"In optimal conditions, the solar panels can add up to 44 miles a day"
And in REALISTIC conditions, it might add what, 10? 15? Just make sure to accelerate slowly or it might be just 1 mile, as long as you also don't turn on the A/C. And for this amazing feat, you can spend a QUARTER MILLION dollars for an ugly car you can't even secure in a garage (no sun there, you know... but it is where your power outlet might be). Solar cells are neat. But a few square meters of cells isn't going to do much for
Um, Snow? (Score:2)
It could be cool, and work in many places, just not the mid-western US in winter or other places on the planet where clouds are common during half the year.
incredible (Score:2)
And a looker too (Score:2)
A stellar price, for sure (Score:2)
for such a empyreal car.
A clocksping on the back would make more sense (Score:2)
$260000?! Have you heard of Aptera recently? (Score:1)
Solar cars can be an intriguing prospect, but usually only for very specific use cases, like when people don't have access to charge where they park, like apartment dwellers.
I have access to on street parking, and live in a sunny location and don't drive that much, which is why the Aptera makes a lot of sense for me, and I can actually afford it, unlike this thing.
The Aptera isn't in production yet, though it's getting closer by the month and actually has a very good chance of succeeding.
There is no
Just a gimmick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think flexible solar panels are available, store a roll of them in the trunk and arrange for the car to have awning supports on each corner, roll out the awning whenever you park in the sun and as a bonus it keeps the car in the shade.
it could probably have more surface area too
Re: (Score:2)
Grow hay on the roof of the garage. Feed the hay to your horse. Pull your car with your horse. Voila! Solar powered car. Runs on only about 750 watts.
Solar Bikes (Score:2)