Honestly it seems like a no-brainer to me to put a solar panel on the roof of electric cars to increase their action radius, so I figured there’s probably one or more good reasons why they don’t.
Also, I acknowledge that a quick google could answer the question, but with the current state of google I don’t want to read AI bullshit. I want an actual answer, and I bet there will be some engineers eager to explain the issues.
There are some, but as mentioned several times, the traditional car is too heavy for solar panels to be effective. There are some vehicles that are essentially enclosed motorcycles like the Aptera where it can be effectively used, though. Aptera can use solar panels effectively because even at their largest battery capacity, it’s still significantly lighter than an EV sedan.
The amount of power you could pull from a single square metre of solar on the roof wouldn’t increase your range meaningfully.
What it would do, is that you could possibly keep your starter-battery from going dead-flat if you left your car alone for a 1/2 month, in the summer ( snow would cover it, obviously ), & since bringing a lead-acid battery to dead-flat permanently-damages it, this would prevent costly problems for the car-owners.
( this happened to a friend with a Prius: had to replace the battery, and the damned thing was inside the rear wheel-well??? in a little compartment.
Origami-engineering’s … simultaneously incredible & stupidly-frustrating )
I’ve held for years that they should be doing it to keep the starter-battery trickle-charging, but … why make the customers have fewer costly/frustrating problems?
Wouldn’t it better to just build more solars to power the chargers? It scales independently.
Modern EVs such as Teslas have a high power consumption, much higher than some PV panels on the roof could deliver. Thus, it would only increase the weight of the car while not significantly increasing their range.
In addition to weight, there’s cost. They would have to be integrated into the design, not just normal, flat solar panels, so there’s a significant cost increase. It’s no problem on a delivery van, but anything curvy is probably prohibitively expensive to develop and produce.
Once upon a time Audi had solar panels on the roofs of their car and it could only generate enough power to run the cabin fan to try to cool the car down while you were parked.
To give you an idea of the sheer amount of power that an EV requires to move its bulk, look at the sizes of their batteries vs home battery packs. An EV has battery packs of around 100kWH and that can get you a few hundred miles range at most. Now compare that to the requirements of a home battery. The average use for an entire home is about 30kWH per day, and most home batteries only recommend 10-15kWH.
Looking at that you start to see the massive difference in power usage required. To charge a small home battery like that you usually need multiple panels (10+). They just don’t have the space and power generation to offset the sheer amount of power EVs require.
The same could be asked with smartphones.
Why don’t smartphones include solar panels on the back side of the phone?
Do you usually use your phone in the sun or leave it exposed to direct sunlight?
We buy solar phone chargers for use in the backyard. They work ok. It would take a long time to fully charge, but it will keep you from going empty.
I have a very vague memory of watching a video where someone calculated the amount of energy produced, which was minimal. The benefit vs the cost is very poor.
While most of the points are covered here, and it’s likely true that the cost to add the panel and micro inverters is high, (I built a small two panel one battery off-grid system for about $4000 to power a chest freezer)… I have a counter point that I feel should be considered.
While it’s true that it isn’t going to extend driving range by much, my thought is that it is still worth it. Take these examples:
Drove to great wolf lodge in the summer, left car in parking lot for 3 days without charge. It lost several %.
Left car in an airport lot for a week lost even more power.
Drove to NorCal, left car at Airbnb driveway, had to find charging despite the car sitting in very bright sunshine for 4 days.
Car camping
Apartment complex parking (literally one of the main negatives about EVs)
All of these would benefit from trickle charging, even if it was just to prevent the drain of sitting.
What car do you have? I worried about this for my Model 3 back in 2021, when it had some vampire drain. But if you don’t open the app on your phone, the car goes into deep sleep and it can be parek for weeks without a single 1% loss.
You seem to know what you’re talking about and I want to piggyback off this question to ask why they don’t harvest energy from the brakes or the wheels spinning. I always heard braking once could power a home for a day or something. And I assume if you put a passive spinning wheel power generator on each of the four wheels, you’d also produce a lot of energy. Are all of these things too heavy to have any benefit? Plus the wind passing the car as it drives…it just feels like there are a lot of missed opportunities for new energy production as the car moves that aren’t taken advantage of. What’s holding these ideas back?
Most electric cars have regenerative braking. It’s not magic though, it takes more energy to speed the car back up than it recovers. Regenerative braking just makes stopping less bad for range. Sure you can go down a mountain and gain a lot of power, but not enough to go back up the mountain.
All newer cars do this. It’s called regenerative braking.
Electric cars do charge when braking. Obviously the energy recuperated is less then waht was needed to drive that fast in the first place. Using driving wind would just increase the energy needed to drive that speed and would be net negative.
The problem is that this isn’t really even trickle charging. Customers would absolutely complain and say it’s not working because it couldn’t charge the battery more than 1-2% in an entire day of sun. EV batteries are 60kWh+ yet getting more than 2kWh/sq meter daily from residential panels is hard for much of the US. Add to that the:
- weight of panels
- cost of panels
- heat trapped in the car from having a roof literally designed to absorb solar radiation
- fragility of panels (although all these glass roof EVs have that problem already) And it’s really not worthwhile.
One solution to the apartment street parking problem is adding charging ports to streetlights (they do this in Europe). But for most of US apartments there’s already dedicated parking space so also space for chargers. The unruly size of new vehicles is a much bigger problem in my mind, if there were actual motivation to fix this problem in government it would already be solved through some tax credits.
the question then becomes how much weight are you adding/energy are you consuming by having to carry the weight. I honestly don’t know and considering how heavy batteries are it is likely not that significant, but if you are only getting a few % charge a day then anything eating into that is going to hurt.
I still see some merit in a more utility style vehicle where you do expect to take it out camping, but for a daily commuter I think most people would prefer the sunroof to the trickle charging.
Also as an apartment dweller… I just wish they’d make normal wall outlets more available. Not everyone needs a proper fast charger but only having a few inconveniently located ones to fight for also sucks. But if more spots could just plug in and slow charge that would be a huge improvement
It would be cool if they were built into the highway and could charge your car as you drive over it. That might make toll roads almost worth it.
The Fisker Ocean has solar panels on its roof. It can add 4 or 5 miles a day if fully exposed to the sun.
Not enough to matter. It’s a gimmick.
If you don’t have an EV, you may think that EV owners are worried about range, and they’d welcome any increase. I have not found this to be true.
It’s more like having a car that starts every day with a full tank. You’re never going to burn through that in a single day. Pretty soon you don’t care about range, efficiency, or pay much attention to the battery meter. It only matters if you’re on a road trip, which for me is a couple times a year.
I would not want to give up a nice full-roof sunroof for a few extra miles a day.
The newest revision of the prius has an option for rooftop solar. The break even point is relatively long, in the 5-8 year time frame iirc. The energy generation isn’t massive; at 185w it won’t substantially extend the range something like 5 miles per day.
Right. Unless you live in US and have relatives you regularly visit in a different city in the same state only 400km away.
I mean I still don’t care about solar panels on my roof and I’m much happier with a moon roof on my PHEV. Nearly 80km of electric range means I’m driving an electric car 99% of the time and have convenience of 5 minute fill ups when I go further.
For an extra miles a day… if you park in the full sun all day every day. Garage? 0. Driveway? Probably shadow half a day.
if i park in the shade, and therefore don’t have to turn on the ac as soon as I get in, I think that would be about the same, savings wise.
While that might not be economically feasible, I’ve always wondered why plug-in electrics couldn’t send power back into the grid. No solar? Send energy onto the grid during the day from the car and recharge during the off-hours at night. Solar? Recharge during the day and send energy onto the grid at night. Just make sure to set a minimum charge that will get you to a charging station.
Some do, but to do this, the point of entry to the grid needs to be set up in such a way as to support this, with an automatic transfer switch for when the grid disconnects, and a meter that reads energy use as both incoming and outgoing, rather than the default of all incoming.
Source: am electrician who has installed batteries on peoples houses
IIRC some car batteries can be used that way, but it wears out the battery.
For LFP batteries it’s irrelevant. They have a 3000 cycles to 80% cap, some of the new ones have 6000. That’s 10 or 20 years assuming full discharges an recharges everyday.
Or in terms of lifespan, assuming a realistic 400km range (250 miles), it’s between 1.2M and 2.4M km before the range reduces to 80% (750k and 1.5M miles). The car will be completely Theseus-ed at the point.
Solar cells on a car have no real use. You would have to leave the car out in the sun for weeks to months to charge it up just once.
Seems worth offering as an option. If you can get 10-20 kms out of the solar panel in decent time it might be enough of an emergency precaution to give people who live outside of cities less reason to poopoo EVs
There’s two problems with this:
Panels are not free. They cost money to install, weight to move around, and prevent you from a mega-sunroof that most EVs have.
Second, if you think one inconvenient charge per month will make people outside of cities and disparage (for whom EV already offer the most advantages) change their opinion, I think you will be disappointed. Most of them formed their opinion by “but I don’t wanna!”, not by any logical thinking.
This is the exact type of gimmick/bullshit they can utilize to convince people to get over irrational fears. Because people are often irrational when making decisions.
But its also tied directly into the fear of running out of juice in the middle of no where. It not only offers but actually gives people comfort and security. Even its really not meant to actually be used regularily or ever really.
I know one mechanic who has both a Model S and Leaf. He HATES that his model S slowly drains the battery when not used and his leaf does not. And he can explain the difference both why and how. If a company just used that fact to sell their car over any car that also loses charge sitting unused they will absolutely have an advantage for people. Imagine parking your car for weeks and it always being as charged as you left it or more instead of sometimes having to worry if you have a dead car waiting for you because you realized after the fact that you left it with a low charge
I absolutely do think it will change enough minds. I work in the industry from the repair side. But also with people who use their vehicle to pay their wage. I know this can work towards removing that part of the equation because there is a TON of people who dont want EVs to replace ICE and they stoke every dumb fear people have. Having the option, however poorly it performs has always been a net postive as long as it does perform the way its supposed to
Good sales people try to understand what is preventing people from making good choices. Bad ones just lie to you.
Additional costs are exactly what people expect to pay extra for ask in think that’s really a moot point beyond getting the amount in the right ballpark.
I appreciate the long form reasoning, but I disagree. People I’ve met that don’t like EVs, they don’t like EVs first, look for a reason later. There is of course a tiny, minuscule minority that do more than 300 miles of driving a day and cannot spare 15 minutes to charge, but that is well under 0.1% of drivers.
The Dutch have been working on this for ages : https://lightyear.one/
Because it barely matters. Like putting an extra AA battery in the glove box.
Well now the question is why they don’t put an extra AA battery in the glove box.
Solar panels on cars are thought of the wrong way. The responses in this thread really demonstrate that.
It’s true that they’re kind of pointless on EVs, because they’re never going to supply enough power to not need a proper charge, which makes the panels redundant.
Where they could be useful is hybrids, sold as something that makes the engine 10-20% more efficient.
I vaguely remember reading something about a Prius with solar panel on the roof. It was enough to run a small fan to keep the interior a little cooler. In theory it improved efficiency because the air conditioning had less work to do
