Solar powered motorcycle now an impractical reality

Why is this guy smiling? Unlike your Zero, his electric motorcycle is solar powered. To build the bike, Jim Corning started with his wife's Ninja 250, adding a front wheel cover and extending the back end for aerodynamics. The motor is powered by lithium-ion phosphate batteries, which are recharged by four 800-watt solar panels mounted to the roof of his house (so it's not like you can just sit out in a field somewhere and charge up). The current design gets up to 70 mph and a range of about 50 miles: no power cord required. Want to make one yourself? Hit the read link for more details, and don't forget to be super rich and totally insane.

[Woogs @ Sep 29th 2008 5:28PM]

Awesome! It's a Ninja 250 with a dangerous fairing design (that was banned from competition for good reason!), hideous aesthetics, reduced power and a limited range! It's probably heavier from being crammed full of batteries and I doubt the suspension has been tweaked to compensate.

In short, he's taken an extremely practical, fuel-efficient small motorcycle that's fun to ride and instead turned into a short-range lumbering, ugly monstrosity that probably costs 10x as much! I'd sooner be seen on a scooter than that thing.

[chris @ Sep 29th 2008 6:28PM]

Yeah, I see nothing but a face full of asphalt for anyone riding that thing if the
front tire ever goes flat or delaminates. I bet the whole front of that bike would
explode into sharp fiberglass projectiles if that front fender hit even an empty
cardboard box at freeway speeds.

[StalematE @ Sep 29th 2008 5:30PM]

prepare to have EVERYONE laugh at you when you're seen riding that ugly piece of garbage on wheels.

[Lowest Ranked @ Sep 29th 2008 6:39PM]

I'm prepared.

[phanbouy @ Sep 29th 2008 7:09PM]

they're all gonna laugh at you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!one!

[iEye @ Sep 29th 2008 7:53PM]

This, unlike other so called "Green Vehicles" is actually green, it uses free energy from the sun.. not like the Chevy Volt that needs to be charged from another power source, of like the Air car that needs compresed air that was powered by coal burned to generate electricity...

This is free energy from the sun.... oil pigs want this guy dead

Shareef don't like it!

[Predator.Z6 @ Sep 29th 2008 8:36PM]

@ iEye: Yeah, but who cares when it just looks like a piece of $H1T on wheels?

[bill @ Sep 29th 2008 10:08PM]

@iEye:

Hey... That thing is red! You almost got me that time!!

[Derbeste @ Sep 29th 2008 5:34PM]

Practical for you and me? no.

But when you see so many of these alternatively powered vehicles being made in people's HOMES, it boggles my mind why mass production can't bring things like this mainstream before 2010.

Why gas is still the only mainstream option after 70+ years, I'll never know.

[kjb434 @ Sep 29th 2008 5:51PM]

Because it still remains the cheapest.....

Look, Europe has had expensive gas and diesel for much longer than the US and haven't made massive switches to new fangled technology. And over there the car driving population is going up.

When you understand that the carbon pollution from vehicles doesn't hurt the environment and doesn't contribute to global warming, you tend to not give a crap about these inferior technologies that produce vehicles that aren't fun to drive.

[Abuzar Baloach @ Sep 29th 2008 6:09PM]

Saying POLLUTION doesn't hurt the environment is just plain stupid...

[Kamokazi @ Sep 29th 2008 6:27PM]

"When you understand that the carbon pollution from vehicles doesn't hurt the environment and doesn't contribute to global warming, you tend to not give a crap about these inferior technologies that produce vehicles that aren't fun to drive."

Slow down a minute here, slick.

You're giving those of us that question the global warming theory and its causes a very bad name. We have a hard enough time as it is.

Carbon pollution hurts the environment. It is bad. That has been proven. That is common sense. The question is, HOW bad exactly? Is it major? Is it minor? Does it make any noticable impact whatsoever? This is what all these global warming 'studies' are failing to evaluate with proper scientific method...because sensationalist claims (that may skip a few minute details) bring in the grant money, don't they?

I agree we don't need to go bailing headfirst into expensive, impractical, and inefficeint 'green' technologies, but making blanket statements like you did is just plain stupid and ignorant.

[loosely_coupled @ Sep 29th 2008 6:52PM]

@KJB434

Do you have a functioning cerebrum ? Why is every comment section on most technology blogs tainted with such egregious anti-climate change nonsense from these uneducated morons? Are these people that naive and ignorant to actually be persuaded by the propaganda being spewed by energy companies and right-wing politicians and other special interest groups with vested interests in oil, natural gas, coal, and other industries that are going to have to pay bigtime for all the C02 they put into the environment, not to mention that they are going to become obsolete and be replaced with renewable energy markets. These idiots should actually do some research themselves on the issues and not listen to propaganda. listen closely: EVERY LEGITIMATE SCIENTIFIC ACADEMY IN THE G8 SUPPORTS THE CONSENSUS VIEW OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING. There is not ONE legitimate national scientific group that doesn't.

[phanbouy @ Sep 29th 2008 7:09PM]

no, kbi49j4q is right, solar technology is really nothing more than hemp patties sold by conspiracist tree hugging [insert ethnic group here]

[kornation @ Sep 29th 2008 7:14PM]

'Look, Europe has had expensive gas and diesel for much longer than the US ..'

We also drive cars that have 4x the mpg than most US cars - and buy what's best Eco that's available - my car averages 55-65mpg and is fun to drive, most US are lumbering along at 10-20mpg.

'When you understand that the carbon pollution from vehicles doesn't hurt the environment and doesn't contribute to global warming..'

I hate this arguement, so ill point out a couple of things..

If the Eco's are wrong, we still get cheaper travel, cleaner air, less waste, more local jobs, and don't loose much.
If the 'Climate change is balooney' is wrong - our entire species dies.

Which one you want to place your bet on? Ignore the climate change arguement and think of the money in your pocket arguement, use less energy = pay less for energy, use less gas = pay less for gas, recycle aluminium = cheaper aluminium based products - see a pattern?

[BigD145 @ Sep 29th 2008 8:03PM]

After reading what many posters write on engadget, burn baby burn. There are so many options for living cleaner and healthier, but noooOOOooo. It's ugly and apparently people like their cancer, kidney/liver failure, and lower IQ. People working at BK are just so concerned by the estate tax that they have to put people in power to deregulate and "get gov't off our backs" so car manufacturers can make 5mpg behemoths that run on a fuel that costs more, is taxed less, and will be gone in 25 years.

[Mulan @ Sep 30th 2008 1:27PM]

Actually, disbelief of the present evidence for a significant anthropogenic link to global warming and willingness to purchase a fuel efficient vehicle are not mutually exclusive.

[happy_penguin @ Sep 29th 2008 9:52PM]

kjb is right about one thing, petroleum is still the cheapest.

[Wwhat @ Sep 30th 2008 5:56AM]

Global warming (as in a percentual increase of the combined global temperature) won't kill our species, even in the worse case scenarios, it would cause havoc and be expensive as some areas that are now placid and dry would get less so, but it would also have benefits, a more tempered worldwide climate will cause more crops to grow in more places for instance.
And CO2 is all natural and we just change the state from solid in the ground to gaseous, it's just that normally there's only a certain percentage in the atmosphere at one time, but scientist will tell you that even if there's way too much the system will self-regulate again after a few hundred years if we reduce emissions. It might destroy societies and civilisation in the very worst case, but not the species.

Meanwhile the system of interaction of all factors is so complex that we just don't have clear picture of it all, and when I say we I include science, all we can go by is rough estimates and global observation based on percentages and we can use common sense to determine certain cause-and-effect predictions, but not as much predictions as some claim though, too many factors and unknowns.

But that there is a pollution issue was even accepted in the end by president bush, and that means it's THAT obvious even to those that actively do not want to know.
What is different now is that the effect of our pollution which used to be local has become global, and that means the thing gets in a whole new category and we can't ignore it quite as easy anymore like we used to.

As for the argument regarding euro and their cars vs fuel price, I'd like to point out euro cars have always been at least half the weight of US cars, and a third the size, plus the higher fuel price is the effect of tax, and they used to use that tax for some stuff the people benefited from like public health care and that made it somewhat acceptable (now of course they privatised everything and let the people pay themselves but did NOT cut taxes, showing euros are even bigger suckers than americans for the time being, but the current crisis shows americans are catching up on the most suckered hitlist though.)

[Wwhat @ Sep 30th 2008 5:58AM]

I apologize for the length of my previous post, I didn't notice I was rambling on so much :o

[kornation @ Oct 2nd 2008 9:06AM]

couple of errors wWhat, partially correct thou.

'a more tempered worldwide climate will cause more crops to grow in more places for instance.'

This argument is used claiming that the more northern/southern areas of the world are becoming more useful to the farming of certain crops, this is true, but the adverse affect is the area closer to the equator is becoming to hot for said crops, the problem here is the natural shape of the planet and the land masses available, there is more land mass nearer the equator than the poles, flat earth maps are normally used by sudo-scientists to back this argument, even though they don't take the natural curvature of the earth into equation,

'It might destroy societies and civilisation in the very worst case, but not the species.'

Our species is very fragile and can live only live in certain circumstances, the less food, water and more heat can lead to an E.L.E (Extinction-Level Event). While each factor alone might not - combined they would be deadly, add the fact that more energy would be needed to keep the species in its safe zone and it would add to the already deadly effects and cause it to speed up.

This already has a precident, during the heat waves across Europe and America in 2006 the energy usages peaked, and in some places broke down, causing thousands to be hospitalised and hundreds to be killed, they also caused major damage that required more energy to be repaired, this increase created more CO2 into the atmosphere than before. Its not at the stage of self-powering but its edging closer.

Saying George Bush accepts this is like saying tobacco firms share holders accept new research from a scientist paid by them saying cancer is not smoke related, take a closer look at the company's his family and friend's own shares and are on the board of directors of.

There are chances this won't happen, but you don't leave a loaded gun in the same room as your children, the best bet is to take the loaded gun out of the equation in the first place.

(The tax issue I am ill-informed on, although I do believe that the services privatised were mainly self-funded entity's (trains, water, electric, gas) and those that were not were dropped for draining tax that was needed for other more worthwhile services, and was done ethically (council houses being sold to their tenants).)

[ac14 @ Sep 29th 2008 5:39PM]

Unless it uses that newfangled. wireless power, i highly doubt it requires no power cord.

[kjb434 @ Sep 29th 2008 5:54PM]

So this is only useful if you have lots of sun. You'll have to need a power cord or some sort of charging apparatus. The sun just isn't enough to keep it charged unless you have endless sun to park it under.

[Lowest Ranked @ Sep 29th 2008 6:51PM]

Seeing as the Sun has several billion years left in its lifecycle, I'd say its safe to assume its 'an endless sun', as far as you need to be concerned.

[phanbouy @ Sep 29th 2008 7:00PM]

the Sun doesn't vote republican enough for kbgb478

[ChuChu @ Sep 29th 2008 7:45PM]

@kjb434: So Right! We should also stop all forms of hydroelectric power because there is no telling when the water could stop flowing or - god forbid - start flowing in the other direction which would cause the energizer bunny to spontaneously combust.

[Wwhat @ Sep 30th 2008 6:04AM]

You guys must all live in southern california or new mexico or something if you have the view that there's always sun, plus you guys must goto bed early if you never drive in the evening.
It's all a bit freakish.

[HDGMansur Harold D.Garrison @ Sep 29th 2008 5:42PM]

gotta start somewhere.

[Blackstar @ Sep 29th 2008 6:55PM]

Going to end up in the same place with that.

[BigD145 @ Sep 29th 2008 8:04PM]

95% of US drivers only need a vehicle with a 45 mile range.

[Blackstar @ Sep 29th 2008 8:28PM]

Doesn't matter what his commute distance is. He still has to come home to Uglytown every single day driving that thing.

[jonathan @ Sep 29th 2008 9:25PM]

how about starting to explain where you can find an 800W solar module.

(4 modules totaling 800W)

[Artie Lange @ Sep 29th 2008 5:48PM]

Do you see that cougar in the upper left hand corner? She would never talk to you if you rode one of these.

[phanbouy @ Sep 29th 2008 8:01PM]

not that the handlebar stachio and tucked in shirt are doing much

[Andrew @ Sep 29th 2008 5:49PM]

is that hi wife nina walking over? in fact what is sheee doing at a geek convention.

i figured it out

photoshop.

[Knives_Out @ Sep 29th 2008 5:53PM]

ya .. we need a closeup of that older babe on the left.

[bangladeshiluv @ Sep 29th 2008 5:59PM]

milf

[one1082 @ Sep 29th 2008 5:49PM]

Looks a bit like the Akira bike too

[sonicwind @ Sep 29th 2008 5:55PM]

I built an electric dirtsurfer that will go 42mph and 40mi for under 2k. I'm just saying. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZvsKaSre28

[Lowest Ranked @ Sep 29th 2008 6:56PM]

Sell them for $2800 and you'd make a killing. Not as fun as using a kitewing but definitely more versatile.

[computer.dude.28 @ Sep 29th 2008 5:59PM]

I'm not gonna lie. That thing looks ridiculous.

[rcappo @ Sep 29th 2008 9:28PM]

The front half looks fine, I'm just wondering what they were thinking in the back?

It would have been much better to take the section that is higher than the seat and move it to the back. It would be a few feet longer, bu the center of gravity would come down, it would be more aerodynamic, and would look much better.

[bill @ Sep 29th 2008 10:16PM]

Don't you mean REDiculous???!

[computer.dude.28 @ Sep 29th 2008 11:03PM]

No, Bill, I meant ridiculous.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ridiculous

[Wolfticket @ Sep 29th 2008 6:01PM]

I don't think it looks tooooo bad, just more car-y than bike-y, probably due to the decent aerodynamics. Could be a very effective mode of transport, especially if you happen to live 25 miles from work.

[tulkas @ Sep 29th 2008 6:22PM]

I wonder who is laughing here?
when fuel runs out and civilisation is reduced to canabalism this guy will be ok provided he can get away from the highway gangs.
all he needs is to convert it to a gyrocopter and get a big python to guard it.

[tekdroid @ Sep 29th 2008 7:04PM]

When fuel runs out I wonder how they'll make those shiny new batteries, bike parts and solar cells he'll need when maintenance costs come-a-knockin' :) Or indeed who will service the roads people use, if they haven't been torn apart and used for crops by that point, to reduce dependence on cannibalism :)

[brad smith @ Sep 29th 2008 7:39PM]

It's all nice and all, but who is the blonde in the background ????

[The Dude @ Sep 29th 2008 7:47PM]

I was going to bring her up. FORGET THE DORK BIKE.

[Babau @ Sep 29th 2008 7:52PM]

There are so many electric motorcycles out there that _don't_ look like turds. Any one of them could be charged from solar panels.

This one, for example, has a top speed of 80mph and a range of 35 to 100 miles, depending on conditions, and won't get you punched in the face for riding it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrFPMLAfs3s&eurl=

http://www.maxdon.com./gpr.html