Beijing event elevates interest in cars using solar power

Beijing event elevates interest in cars using solar power

Hanergy has launched solar-powered cars and they can be commercialized, in an announcement from Bejing earlier this month.

Dreaming about fully solar powered passenger cars in the future is easy and pleasant; more difficult has been the reality of charge anxiety and worrying over the presence of charging posts and having to make many mental notes about the distance per charge needed.

Taking the leap of faith and switching from gas to solar-powered mobility may be a stretch for many buyers, but Hanergy's news may generate interest.

Hanergy's announced cars are getting their energy from the sun. Zero charging is possible during medium as well as short distance trips. Power comes from affixed thin-film solar cells.

Here are the sun-and-range numbers from the company: with five to six hours of sunlight, the thin-film solar cells on the vehicle can deliver eight to ten kilowatt-hours of power a day, allowing it to travel about 80 km. The company said that this would meet the needs of city driving under normal circumstances.

Hanergy said they count themselves as the leading "thin-film solar power" company in the world (Bloomberg reported that Hanergy Holding is the Beijing-based parent of Hanergy Thin Film Power Group Ltd.)

They announced four cars: a sports car named Hanergy Solar R, Hanergy Solar O, Hanergy Solar L and Hanergy Solar A.

The cars use solar energy as the main source of driving force through control and managing systems. These systems include (1) a photoelectric conversion system (2) energy storage system and (3) intelligent control system.

Under routine-day use, the vehicles can charge themselves with clean solar energy while traveling. If the sun is weak, then lithium batteries kick in, getting power from charging posts, enabling them to travel a maximum of 350 km per charge.

Users select charging modes in accordance with varied weather conditions through apps on their mobile devices.

As for cleaning the solar cells, the vehicles are equipped with "ultrasonic cleaning technology" for maintaining the cells.

The four cars have (GaAs) dual-junction solar cells; they are integrated with these GaAs thin-film solar cells, covering 3.5 to 7.5 square meters, respectively.

" Hanergy's thin-film solar achievements are already at the bleeding edge of solar efficiency, with the company's gallium arsenide (GaAs) dual-junction recently hitting a record conversion rate of 31.6%," said TreeHugger.

Autoblog's take? "We'll believe it when we can drive 'em," said Brandon Turkus, contributor. Turkus looked at the numbers— five to six hours of sunlight – good enough for a shade under 50 miles of driving range.

"That is an extremely lofty goal, one that Hanergy says is due to the 38 to 81 square feet of solar panels covering each car's body. The solar film apparently has a conversion rate of 31.6 percent."

Turkus added, "That means that the panels store 31.6 percent of the sunlight that hits them as electricity – it's a record-breaking figure, according to Hanergy..."

Tycho De Feijter, who writes about the Chinese car market and founded CarNewsChina.com, said in Forbes that, "The four Hanergy vehicles are basically standard electric cars with solar power functioning as an extra source to extend range." He provided some details about the quartet and what they might mean to the future of driving.

He said that "the current conversion rate of its high-end cells is 31.6%, but this is expected to go up to 38% in 2020 and 42% in 2025. That would make "a fully-solar powered car possible, according to the company."

He discussed interesting features: solar panels can be used to power different motors. The Hanergy Solar R has solar panels on the hood and the roof. "The former are being used to power an electric motor on the front axle, whereas the latter powers a motor on the rear axle."

What is more, he wrote, the surface of the solar panels can be extended when the vehicle is stopped to allow for faster charging— temporarily using windows as extra panels or by folding out the roof-based , space-station style.


Explore further

Chinese solar company blames short-sellers for stock trouble

More information: www.hanergy.com/en/content/details_37_3602.html

© 2016 Tech Xplore

Citation: Beijing event elevates interest in cars using solar power (2016, July 10) retrieved 15 October 2019 from https://techxplore.com/news/2016-07-beijing-event-elevates-cars-solar.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
62 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jul 10, 2016
Clean power with no pollutants. Good-bye coal and nukes.

31% efficiency seems to be really high, however. Can it be true?

Jul 10, 2016
80 kilometers on 8-10 kWh is also a bit too optimistic.

A realistic figure for a small car driving at normal speeds is about 200 Wh/km which includes auxillary devices such as lights, stereo and ventilation fans etc. They propose to do between 100-125 Wh/km which is achievable only in special circumstances, or by making the car small and slow, and completely unrealistic if you turn on the AC/Heater.

"the vehicles can charge themselves with clean solar energy while traveling"


with 3.5 - 7.5 sq-m of panels in direct sunlight and ~31% efficiency, the car would have between 1 - 3 kW for power budget, which is less than the engine power of a lawnmower. It's barely enough to drive a golf kart, much less a roadgoing vehicle, and certainly not enough to also charge the batteries on the go.

Jul 10, 2016
"31% efficiency seems to be really high, however. Can it be true?"


In practice, I doubt it. The practical efficiency is always lower because the panel is rarely pointing directly at the sun, it's dirty, hot, and any partial shade turn the affected cells into series resistors that dissapate energy.


Jul 10, 2016
We get 4 miles/kWh in our VW e-Golf, so I really doubt they get that much more.

Jul 10, 2016
More algore droppings from the pseudo-Marxists in Peiping, Peking, Beijing, whatever.

Jul 10, 2016
If you have nothing to add, then add nothing, "Shootist".

Ever drive an EV? No?

Come on by, and I'll show you the performance of an electric. Ours is charged by the sun, by storing the energy in the grid, and using it at night.

You don't drive a noisy, stinking Diesel, do you?

Jul 10, 2016
"We get 4 miles/kWh in our VW e-Golf, so I really doubt they get that much more."


And we in turn have doubted that before. EV's have a huge variability in power consumption in different environments and driving speeds. A 50% drop from the manufacturer's claimed range is common, and the EPA/NEDC tests usually give results somewhere in between.

Volkswagen claims 127 Wh/km for the e-golf. (4.9 mi/kWh)
The EPA rates it at 83 miles for 24 kWh, which is 180 Wh/km. (3.5 mi/kWh)
Road tests in less than optimal conditions with auxillaries on have put it down to 52 miles over 19 kWh (80% discharge), which is 228 Wh/km (2.7 mi/kWh)

In other words, EV manufacturers are systematically exaggerating the performance of the vehicles, and any figures posted before offical tests should be taken with a spoonful of salt anyways because it's highly dependent on who's driving it and where.

Jul 10, 2016
We have the real numbers, and those are with the use of lights, heat, and A/C. They certainly do change with the use of auxiliaries, but our number of 4 miles/kWh is what it comes out to be. The claim of 85 miles/charge is still over 100/charge so far.

Speaking of performance, . . go drive one.

Jul 10, 2016
Well, gas engine efficiency is 20% so yeah, solar is the way to go. Shocking when you think about it as the fuel efficiency hasn't improved in over 50. And were told these endless wars are about oil? Nope, its political rearrangement of the chess pieces to checkmate Russia.

Jul 10, 2016
"The claim of 85 miles/charge is still over 100/charge so far."


Again, that depends on who drives it, how, and where. If you just take it around the block to the bingo hall and back, the energy consumption will be low. If you take it on the I-80 and actually go somewhere, the energy consumption will be high.

This is the reason why the manufacturers can make wild claims without getting instantly sued: they're all "up to".

Jul 10, 2016
"Well, gas engine efficiency is 20% so yeah, solar is the way to go. Shocking when you think about it as the fuel efficiency hasn't improved in over 50."


Actually, it has. Modern gasoline engines push 30-40% within their optimal power band, but consumers prefer large cars with large engines that rarely reach their optimum, lots of accessories and smooth automatic transmissions instead of manual/DSG, which end up negating all the gains.

Trying to juggle between consumer demand for comfort, safety and performance, and government demand for more fuel efficient autos then leads to all sorts of weird and expensive compromises and gimmicks and outright cheating.

You could make a very fuel efficient car, but it would be very spartan, small and rickety little tin can with minimal safety features. Most people would not buy it, and those who would need it because they can't afford fuel can hardly afford to buy new cars in the first place, so the market is very limited.

Jul 10, 2016
Eikka continues to make comments of alleged fact regarding EV's but suffers from inexperience with them. The problems are exaggerated. In fact, I bought the car just off I-80, and cruised home at 65-70mph in delightful silence.

Those attitude differences are a reflection on why Silicon Valley is here.

Jul 11, 2016
" but suffers from inexperience with them"


How would my "experience" change reality in any way or form? You're promoting magical thinking where the laws of physics change depending on whether you own the car personally.

Take the e-golf, put the AC or heater on and take it down the I-80 in traffic, at speed, and don't tailgate trucks all the way - that's cheating - and report how far you got before the car goes into limp-home mode. I guarantee you it will not be anywhere near 83 miles.

It's gonna go a little bit further in summer than in winter because the air resistance drops at higher temperatatures, but otherwise it will go what reputable people have tested it to go, which is 50-60 miles and that's it. To go further you really do need to start employing some tricks like driving 10 below the traffic or tailgating.

Jul 11, 2016
Heck, even Volkswagen itself says that the practical driving range of the e-Golf in the winter is between 50-75 miles - far cry from the optimistic 118 miles they claim for the top end. Take the car from San Fransisco to Seattle, and your practical range drops in half because it's not all flat and sunny there all the time.

Of course that doesn't apply to gkam who thinks California is the entire world.

Jul 11, 2016
Eikka,I told you we use the car for local trips and it is not suitable for long drives over 100 miles, unless it is recharged.

Please stop resenting someone who has real numbers, not projections or arguments from "figuring".

Jul 11, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
"Please stop resenting someone who has real numbers"

the problem isn't your numbers so much as it's your insistence that you've somehow purchased a product from VW that isn't compatible with VW published evidence

either you've:

1- adapted your EV to function in a far superior way than initially engineered by VW
(this is unlikely as you've not been able to demonstrate engineering proficiency let alone literacy as proven by DaSchneib here: http://phys.org/n...age.html )

OR

2- lied & don't understand the point
(by far the most likely considering your history)

point being:
this is why i also didn't purchase an EV, as noted already to you more than once, but you ignored it

- most of my travel is in cold climates in winter, hence the need for 4WD and an ICE. No one can get the performance out of an EV in cold climates - not even commando engineers with stolen valor like you

Jul 12, 2016
Stumpy, stop the ridiculous and malicious "Stolen Valor" nonsense. Did you get out on a "medical"? I want to know, since you are unable to end your fit of "getting even" with me for pissing you off.

It all fits now, the hiding in the woods, the continual attacks, the insistence on lying for effect, . . . . you need the Vet Center. They take walk-ins. They took me.

Jul 12, 2016
""Stumpy, stop the ridiculous and malicious "Stolen Valor" nonsense. Did you get out on a "medical"? I want to know, since you are unable to end your fit of "getting even" with me for pissing you off.

""It all fits now, the hiding in the woods, the continual attacks, the insistence on lying for effect, . . . . you need the Vet Center. They take walk-ins. They took me""

-Did you walk in or were you 'walked in' by the courts?

"Psychopaths are notorious for not answering the questions asked them. They will answer something else, or in such a way that the direct question is never addressed. They also phrase things so that some parts of their narratives are difficult to understand. This is not careless speech, of which everyone is guilty at times, but an ongoing indication of the underlying condition in which the organization of mental activity suggests something is wrong. It's not what they say, but how they say it that gives insight into their true nature."

Jul 12, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
"stop the ridiculous and malicious "Stolen Valor" nonsense"

1- off topic

2- it's proven that you do not have the "combat V" you claimed because of the lack of annotation on your own DD-214, per AFI/UCMJ law linked in this thread: http://phys.org/n...ity.html

3- you didn't provide evidence stating your vehicle is modified or factory adjusted to perform higher than statistical averages

"They took me"
spreading false information and chronic lies are indicative of early onset dementia
you should consider talking to your primary care provider and seeking sequestration or at least long term care treatment for your degrading mental faculties

medication will help as well

Jul 12, 2016
Outgrow it, Stumpy.

Your hate has warped your reality.

And end the stolen valor stuff. You saw my reviews and know my service, and know it is a lie by you because you got angry.

I do not know if you rally have convinced yourself of this or just are screaming nasties across the playground, but you have to stop.

Go get anger management. I am serious.

Jul 12, 2016
""I do not know if you rally have convinced yourself of this or just are screaming nasties across the playground, but you have to stop.""

-Why do you think it will ever stop?

People need to be reminded daily of the lies george kamburoff has told and of the facts george kamburoff has made up. And thusly, of the kind of person the real george kamburoff is.

Every time you post.

Jul 13, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
"and know ..."

1- per UCMJ: Title 10 U.S.C., Chapter 45, The Uniform, Department of Defense Instruction
AND
(DoDI) 1334.1, Wearing of the Uniform, and Air Force Policy Directive
AND
(AFPD) 36-29, Military Standards
all medals, awards, citations, schools, education, training, badges, honours and notations must be in the 201 file (personnel file) as well as annotated on the DD-214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which "represents the complete, verified record of a service member's time in the military (Active and Reserve), awards and medals, and other pertinent service information, such as highest rank/rate and pay grade held on active duty, total military combat service and/or overseas service, Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) ..."

2- your DD-214 shows no "combat V"

.

.

& you lied about your EV as noted by Eikka & VW

why?
Why can't you get back on topic?

lack of evidence?
like your stolen valor claims?

Jul 13, 2016
You idiot, What part of Outstanding Unit Citation do you not understand. It is not an individual award, by its very name, you fool.

I think you were nowhere near a military outfit.

Jul 13, 2016
"It is not an individual award"
And?
what part of "all medals, awards, citations" did you not understand?

are you illiterate?
or just intentionally being stupid and evasive because you got caught in a lie?
(again)

read the UCMJ and AFI's if you don't believe me, that is what i referenced them for

it's called validation of a fact: i produced evidence refuting your claim

you gave.... nothing but ad hominem

therefore, i can prove my point but you can only call names, snipe and hide on the internet

case closed

.

.

more to the point, as well as on topic:
who modified your EV to be effective in cold climates and give you results that far exceed the VW posted specifications?

did you violate the warranty when you did it?

why doesn't VW spec's comply with your own comments, as noted by Eikka?

Jul 13, 2016
Then end your silly public statements and report me. I want to face my accuser, but you are too SCARED to do anything but discredit my life here.

It is some kind of mental problem of yours, Rumpy. I really do think you were nowhere near any military outfit. Like otto, you have no idea what it is all about, outside of what you read.

Your ignorance of the actual military not in Wiki is wrong again. You apparently have NO experience in the military, which fits your inability to understand how it works or say what you did, and to whom.

Give up on trying to "get even" with me for aggravating you, even if it was unintended. Your present mental state is not good, and I think you will completely go off and do more stupid stuff.

I told you to get help from the Vet Center, but now I understand you are not eligible for that, not having served.

You are just another internet sniper cowering behind a phony name.

Jul 14, 2016
STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
"report me"
1- OT
2- i thought you were going to sue me?
why waste the time when i am waiting for your summons?

problem with your statement is:
it doesn't matter what you "think" or "believe" because i can PROVE you lied using the exact same evidence a judge will require for validation of your claims - your own DD-214 and the UCMJ/AFI's

*

now, back to the topic, you ad hominem red-herring throwing sniping narcissistic troll:

who modified your EV to be effective in cold climates and give you results that far exceed the VW posted specifications?

did you violate the warranty when you did it?

why doesn't VW spec's comply with your own comments, as noted by Eikka?

why can't you actually provide evidence for your claims?

thanks
:-P

Oh, and when you have time:
FOAD
:-)

Jul 14, 2016
Well, I do not know what insult FOAD is, but knowing you it is nasty.

Your need to offend has taken some strange turns, Rumpy. I am not looking to sue you, you have nothing I want, and I will not go back into those third-world woods. They are too depressing. It took me a month to get over the week I spent there, among the old dishwashers, abandoned cars, and shacks in them piney woods.

What I want is to get you into a Vet Center to get the help you need. You are once again inventing things to use against me. It is a sign you have lost touch with reality.

Jul 15, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
"I do not know what insult FOAD is"

if only there was some repository or easily accessible means to actually research all those little things we don't know and are curious about...
[sarc/hyperbole]

well, Your need to offend has taken some strange turns STOLEN-VALOR-Liar-kam.

take the above:
you made a statement (more than one, actually)
you can't validate a single statement you made
the evidence directly refutes your claims, both the UCMJ/AFI's and VW
you state it must be true because...?

it's simple, really
you have made what is called a false claim
(See: http://www.auburn...ion.html )

This is also colloquially known as a "lie"

you can't actually give evidence that refutes anything in this thread

so you are left with ad hominem, sniping, attack and libel
period

you can't refute the truth with more lies
and repeating your lies doesn't make them more true

Jul 15, 2016
Give up your nastiness and get the help you need.

If you cannot tell the difference between an individual award and a unit award, you were NOT in any service, you were a wannabe.

Get the help you need. Give me your name, and I'll send some Vet Center folk to see you. If you were really in a Bush War, then it got to you badly. Go get help.

With your own history, I can do to you what you are trying to do to me, otto/Stump. I can start to bring up who you killed, how many civilians died because of you, and the other stiff you and otto like to throw around.

Ready for it?

Jul 15, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
so... that's a no?
you can't actually validate your claims you made above?

imagine that...

"If you cannot tell the difference between an individual award and a unit award"
unit awards have to be annotated per the UCMJ/AFI's (see above reference) therefore you're proven to be a liar yet again

"I can start to bring up who you killed, how many civilians died because of you"
1- you already did

2- you can't figure out how to read an address embedded in a link and you think you are capable of tracking my past military record without my SSN?

3- you can't do a basic search to learn my non-anonymous identity

4- if you litigate anyone else (like me, PO or otto), but then libel someone on line (already done), that means, by definition, you will never win said litigation as any semi-competent lawyer will point out that you're libelous and established as such

ignorance of the law is no excuse

this is why you have no credibility
no evidence

Jul 15, 2016
I do not want to know your alleged "military" record. I want you to gt the help you need.

You are the typical bad case we see in the Anger Management groups. If you really were in any branch of the service, which I doubt, you would know the difference between a personal award and an Outstanding Unit Citation with combat "V"device.

Like otto, what you "know" seems to come from written sources, and not any experience. Maybe that is why you have all day to attack folk here, sitting all alone at home in the woods, armed and scared.

But you are unable to stop attacking me, the real sign of mental disintegration.

Jul 15, 2016
@STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
your post is still OT and you can't validate your EV claims... why is that?

but i will answer and point out your logical fallacies

"I do not want to know your alleged "military" record"
liar- you keep asking me to post it!
also- how can you post about it if you don't know it?
LOL

"we see in the Anger Management groups"
at least you are under psychiatric care finally
tell them to up the meds

i told you that you needed this one

"which I doubt"
funny thing: every vet i know says that about you!

especially since you didn't know what a 201 file was, that you don't know WTF the regs are, that you can't seem to comprehend UCMJ/AFI regs are for everyone regarding all medals and awards, and that you continually lie about your "experience" and can't validate your claims

real veterans hate people like you who claim to have awards they can't actually prove they have... especially combat related ones
unit OR personal

still NO EVIDENCE from you!

Jul 15, 2016
I only ask to get you to the help you need for your ridiculous hate fixation.

No evidence? You not only have my DD-214, but my performance reviews. Show us yours. Tell us what the Commander said.

"real veterans hate people like you" Really? Know any? I did not see your name in any military website. Want to see mine? The site with the picture of me has been retired, but there are two more with my name. Show us your unit. Just one.

I am not bragging, I am rubbing it in that I am real, and you are hiding behind a phony name, too scared to tell us who you are.

Cowering.

Jul 15, 2016
Let's stop this nasty exchange. Put me on ignore.

Then, ignore me, and stop attacking. I have tried almost everything to get you to end your need to inflict damage on others. I do not know what happened to you, but please get help. I am serious, not goading you.

Jul 16, 2016
STOLEN VALOR liar-kam
1- you still haven't put any evidence on the table proving your EV comments OR your awards citations

2- you still can't comply with UCMJ/AFI's regarding evidence for awards citations, so about that:

"have my DD-214"
yes, and it has NO mention of your Combat V device, even under awards/citations, meaning you're a liar

"my performance reviews"
are irrelevant to the topic of STOLEN VALOR and your chronic lying regarding awards/citations

"I am not bragging"
1- yes you are
2- you're also lying about accomplishments with STOLEN VALOR

"Let's stop this nasty exchange. Put me on ignore"
you can feel free to ignore me
i will continue to point out when you are using STOLEN VALOR or lying, especially when the evidence can't support your claims (/b/ RULE 37)

"Show us yours"
I'm not f*cking stupid enough to post that kind of private information for the world to view - someone could steal my identity!

only an idiot would do that one.

hint, hint

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more