because the panels then need to support and run the wear of cars (which my guess is expensive). roads are repaired quite often because they have to deal with temperature contraction and expansion and also huge shifting weights rolling across them all the time.
Right, but that's all structure and doesn't (er, shouldn't) fundamentally affect the cost of the PV cells themselves. Regardless, I agree that it's not necessarily the most cost-effective choice, I just don't think that it's a response to some perceived lack of space either.
Roads require maintainance and solar panels require maintenance -- couldn't innovation (conceivably) produce a maintenance schedule that can maintain both these things under one process at less cost than maintaining each separately?
