>>1408774>…they are practical and demonstrated ways to make roads that are capable of generating power. They wouldn’t generate any power. They’d leach power from a system already using that power, forcing said systems to work harder to compensate.
>They are better from an conceptual perspective than solar roadways (a flawed idea which seems obvious).Actually, no. They are much worse, but even if they were not, being better than a near infinitely retarded idea does not render an idea viable.
>Now u r just moving the goal posts saying it's a waste of money.What goal posts? Cost is a factor in determining the viability of any idea.
>That's not wrong, but the other truth of the matter is that the invisible hand of the free market is attached to a big retard who will whip around and throw crazy money at all kinds of ideas.So what? All the more reason to make sure that the money not being thrown around by Big Retard actually goes to something useful.
>There's an allure to making roads into energy producers and it won't stop w. solar roadways.I’m almost positive it will, at least the road surface. There will probably be solar panel covered roofs built here and there over freeways, because it will provide added benefit such as reducing temperature fluctuations of the road surface, keep it from getting wet in the rain, reduce or eliminate salting/plowing where applicable etc., but there is no practical way of harvesting energy from the road surface directly at a justifiable cost.
