Terrible idea. Just put a bunch of solar panels in a field. We’re not lacking for space!
People touting the benefits of automated maintenance are missing the fact that solar panels in a field need basically no maintenance at all, whereas railways need constant maintenance and heavy trains are going to do a ton of damage to anything between the tracks.
When a train goes by, the rails literally move up and down, flexing under the heavy load and creating local pressure waves which the ballast (gravel around the tracks) is designed to absorb. Solar panels are made of brittle materials (usually glass) which would shatter if flexed even a small amount. Making special “tough” solar panels to be able to withstand those heavy loads is going to result in very expensive solar panels that produce a lot less electricity because they’re not made of very thin, highly transparent glass.
It might turn out to have more drawbacks than advantages. But to all the “terrible idea, stupid idea” folks in here… What’s up with the 'tude? We’re going to need a lot of ideas. Some will COME OUT of other ideas that didn’t work, but that somebody wanted to try anyway. It’s 100 linear meters. It’s a way to start quantifying the vibrations, the dirt, etc that y’all seem so sure will doom the project (and maybe will)
Solarpunk is about innovation and creative use of technology. This is it. It might be wrong in the long run but somebody will learn something in the process.
Why is this thread so unlike others in here? Why the negativity?
Solar freakin’ railways
I actually liked the idea of solar trails, but then Japan made these tiles that produce electricity when they get stepped on
One of the cool things about those types of technology is that you can stack them. Something like photovoltaics on top, thermoelectric under that to take advantage of the differential between the heat at the solar cell and something like the ground or the tracks themselves, and underneath all that would be the piezoelectric that you’re talking about.
Of course, everything that you add causes some energy loss between each of the systems, but if you’ve got the money for the hardware, then the sunlight is free, the heat from the solar panels is already a planned energy loss, and the noise/vibrations/movement from the trains are known and accepted losses already. Even though each energy transducer wouldn’t be used in its most efficient way, it would still be a net positive.
Hell, make everything easy to disassemble so that it’s super-repairable, even though that introduced even more inefficiencies: it’s still making use of all the free energy just sitting there and waiting for someone to use it.
We could put metal hose in a in asphalt so that the heat from the asphalt could power a turbine. I’m not sure how feasible it would be
Too bad the article is not explaining why SNCF is interested in this project. I can guess that electricity is one of the job of SNCF, they are using a lot of it, they have the skills and network to manage and distribute electricity. They could buy less electricity. Since rails are a well equiped infrastructure, it’s cheaper to put PV in place and everything is available for cables and it’s an electricity network by itself
I found some articles (in french). They already tested a solution to rapidly deploy PV on unused tracks : https://www.groupe-sncf.com/fr/innovation/solveig-prototype-ferrovoltaique
An another article is about this project and gives a bit more details : https://lenergeek.com/2026/02/06/une-startup-suisse-ose-limpensable-produire-de-lelectricite-directement-sur-les-rails-de-train/ It is an experimental project to find if PV panels could survive in such condition and if it is possible to manage both rail and energy operations on the same network.
Still dumb. Less dumb than on roads, but still dumb.
I mean if it’s hardened against dragging defects, I don’t see why not
You’ve complicated maintenance of both the railway and the solar. If you used the space literally next to it in the picture, both would be simplified and have current real world cost and deployments. This is just an investor scam so they can take a bunch of money, and say it was all for this test, that will turn out to be worse and more expensive than anything else.
Then they will try to sucker another city into funding a new test.
It appears dumb, until you think of automated deployment and maintainance, leveraging existing infrastructure.
Or made it easier, since you could do maintenance on the panels with some rail cart directly. I see how solar roadways may not have been convenient, but with rail it’s not as dumb. Placing the panels on the side also means more land use, and not every place in the world is spacious, especially Switzerland
Also, you usually crush and shred the materials in solar panels for recycling, so no one cares if replacing a panel means smashing it to quickly get it out between the tracks. Train tracks move far more than most people would expect, so the panels are already going to have a built-in buffer zone in which you can quickly and easily place a panel. As someone else said, something riding on the rails would likely be leveraged for installation.
Rails have a fairly consistent width when measured on a rough scale, as does the vehicle riding the rails have a fairly consistent center point. As long as the electrical leads are robust enough, and the contacts forgiving enough towards slop, the panels could be designed to just drop in. If curves are too difficult or expensive to accommodate, only install at the flats.
As with any program like this, as long as the overall energy output exceeds the cost of installation, then it’s totally a net positive, even at the lowest levels of efficiency. And if parts break, but you’re still netting positive, then little or no maintenance should be considered over the lifetime of each hardware deployment.
The key thing is ensuring that contracts with suppliers and workers are reasonable and benefit local communities. But that’s just about the biggest difficulty with any transaction these days, isn’t it?
Fair comment, though in real life the space near the tracks is either non-existent either uneven ground filled with rocks and plants, but as other pointed out it could be on roofs, parking lots, etc. Also, apparently the SNCF says they are specifically testing how much it complicates maintenance, so they are aware of this, but even then it’s less direct to test for that, and maybe built it in the future, than to built it in already adapted places.
How about solar on chairs!!!
Ive seen people say:
Put solar panels on rooftops
And on:
Sides of tall buildings
As roofs on parking lots
Bus stops
Electric vehicles
But never seen anyone suggest this
Might be a good idea
Might not. But nice to try
Generally speaking, you want panels to:
-
Have minimal shading (especially by e.g. poles for overhead traction)
-
Not get contaminated by dripping oil/grease/brake dust.
-
Not complicate access (either by being in the way or by being damaged and live) for repairs or rescue efforts.
-
Not be subject to vibration or impact.
-
Be located densely and near connections to the electrical grid, so that the cabling per panel is minimal.
This breaks just about every one of those.
Go put panels on every house/mall/supermarket and then panel roofs over every carpark and railway station first, then we’ll talk.
-
Wouldn’t that shake a bunch and shatter the glass and also just why? Like why would you ever do that?
Wouldn’t that shake a bunch and shatter the glass and also just why?
Solar panels don’t have to necessarily contain glass, the solar cells can be coated with anything as long as it’s transparent, there are in fact flexible solar panels.
Like why would you ever do that?
My guess is infrastructure, the railway company already owns the land, so there’s no upfront land investment.
And maybe they can maybe reuse use of the electric railway infrastructure to wire the panels?
And maybe they can maybe reuse use of the electric railway infrastructure to wire the panels?
Way too high voltage to be practical.
To generate electricity
And the space right next to the track or a field or a roof or a desert or a parking lot or the ocean or literally anything else doesn’t work because?
They don’t own it.
It’s not like shaking is a very novel complication that we have no technological means to counteract.
No, but it does mean that basically everything built for standard domestic/commercial use is unsuitable and instead you have to use rail/marine/heavy-industrial grade equipment, and maintain it regularly.
The dutch aube others) have trailed this in the past. This is a stupid idea bit there you go.
