You've really proven nothing new, especially none of the key concepts you're suggesting are practical.
**All the key concepts are practical, the only thing we've proven is we're not particularly good at explaining them... thanks for cluing us in, when you do this every day it all seems pretty obvious.
I think you mean you hypothesize they are all practical. Until you can demonstrate that you can recover X watts with minimal loss, year round, and without needing 5 times as much hardware as normal I wouldn't consider anything proven.
But I do agree you are completely failing to properly explain your concept and hopefully will have much more to show by time the kickstarter campaign begins.
Your website needs to be completely redone no offense. I'd suggest taking a hint from these guys:
http://www.allied-control.com/ . You should include calculations, diagrams, explanations, and cut out the BS.
**I personally donated to solar roadways, not because it was practical but because it sends a message to manufacturers, developers and governments that this is the kind of change I want to see. Whether you think it was a scam or not he made a trip to the White House (Bill Nye evidently likes him?) and is building the things at a scale previously not possible. Interesting thing is he has already taken orders for several of the first systems proving we either don't understand the economic model or that he doesn't need one to sell the product.
Donating to solar roadways is pretty much admitting engineering is not your thing.
I think your concept is definitely possible and doesn't break any of the laws of physics, but I just cant see it being ever beneficial cost/energy wise.
How can you possibly begin raising funds without a clear business model?
**How can Solar Roadways sell their systems or raise grant money from the DOT without a clear economic model? Saying you don't understand his model likely points to his inability to explain it well or our inability to understand it - it obviously says little about the product's viability since he is actually building and selling it!
It's quite simple, they are taking advantage of the gullible who want to save teh planet. How they received grant money is beyond me but clearly it wasn't thought out by a professional.
They raised
$750,000 to build a
40 square meter solar parking lot. That is $18,000/m2. The same parking lot could have been entirely covered with asphalt for $80 total (~$15,000 if you wanted to cover it with a solar panel roof). I really doubt it costs that much as I'm sure most of the grant money went directly in to the inventors retirement fund, but it's not cheap by any means.
Most people think current solar technology is still far from being cost effective and to add a thick chuck of glass(not cheap), integrated circuits(not cheap), leds, heaters, etc, only makes it that much more expensive. And having solar panels parallel to the ground instead of perpendicular to the sun greatly reduces efficiency.
It's basically just spending ~$1000/m2 so you can combine a road ($2/m2) with a solar panel ($300/m2). It's all just a gimmick.
There are so many much bullshit claims it's impossible to get to all of them in a few paragraphs so I'll just leave you with some videos explaining it more:
http://youtu.be/H901KdXgHs4 http://youtu.be/ocV-RnVQdcsI really hope you guys won't be asking for a ludicrous amount of money so early in the experimental stage.