Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Most energy efficiency talk is just talk, unless it's done to actually save energy costs.
Disney does have a large solar panel array on property. (I forget where.)
I'll let those panels save energy costs.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Disney does have a large solar panel array on property. (I forget where.)
I'll let those panels save energy costs.
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
Several of them in fact, but they just unnecessarily decommissioned one for a rollercoaster.
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
If you really compare the two, CC and Main Street have a heck of a lot more in common than the plaza hub and CC. It's like it serves both purposes. For Future World, it's a core, for World Showcase, it's the thing that funnels you towards it (that is, if you're skipping Future World, kinda like going straight to Fantasyland at MK). And yeah, most of Main Street's exterior doesn't actually suggest what's on the inside at this point. CC doesn't have this issue because it's not trying to mimic anything, you can just stick signage on it. And does anyone remember park maps?
ctrlaltdel
Well-Known Member
Hopefully they add the solar panels back, but if they don't that's very stupid. No reason to do that, I'm sure it would be a good opportunity to new solar panels that are likely more energy efficient as well.
montyz81
Well-Known Member
The strange thing is, If they covered all of their show buildings with solar panels, they would likely make up 2x, maybe 3x the amount of square footage of the current solar farms. Why wouldn't they want to use one that already exists as a way to begin an effort like that.
I am not familiar with every system out there, but for the ones I have dealt with, I would not expect to see any wiring yet. The most I would expect to see is some kind of junction box and even those might not be directly on the roof and/or visible from aerial photos.
I have no clue if they are or are not putting solar panels on this building (my money is on not) but we are still too soon to call it based solely on the phase of construction they are in.
My guess is because they don't want to punch thousands of holes in roofs already problematic for leaking.
The #1 reason for putting solar panels on roofs is not having the land to put them elsewhere. They would be much better off clearing off a few acres of vacant land for another solar farm. Even covering the parking lots with elevated solar panels would be a better option than a rooftop installation.
Survey normal tourists and I will bet that his opinion is in the majority. Yet another reason why we can't have nice things.
Normal tourists don’t have a clue what’s coming anyway.
They couldn’t care if they saw GotG in Epcot, DHS or Universal. Same for frozen etc
Give them what management think they want in places that would be appropriate to those who know what they’re talking about too.
Is now the time to say Forever is scoring highly with guests ?
montyz81
Well-Known Member
The silent majority's influence is with their dollars
The vocal minority doesn't have much impact (well, there is Epcot's new entrance and the park Font). But that is all the vocal minority gets.
Still, that doesn't mean the changes are good. They are not designed to inspire imagination; they are designed to magically make more cash appear in Disney's financial coffers.
Horizons '83
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Also, normal tourists don't know what they missed. If this version of Epcot (whatever it claims to be) is their first experience, its where their bar currently sits (VERY low).
Hawkeye_2018
Well-Known Member
Really hope this ride is open by early 2022.
James Norrie
Well-Known Member
Except the system on Energy was old and inefficient. Normally I'd agree that TWDC makes choices that I can't understand (except that their motivations lie in the almighty dollar, kicking Walt's vision to the side for some cheap half-measures in many cases). This one really doesn't bother me, thematically or otherwise. Like has been said, it's still too early to know if the solar array is gone for good, at this phase of the build. If it comes back, it will be at least 2, maybe 3 generations more advanced than what was there. Better efficiency, better design, and better all around. I personally think that any Solar on RCID land should be over the parking lots, as it could serve a dual purpose of power generation and keeping cars cool in the hot FL sun, and not on the attractions unless they thematically fit there. Guardians traveled in the Milano and now the Benatar, and neither were solar charged (at least that we know of).
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
Ok and? It wouldn't be the first time they've been replaced. We've come a long way with solar cells since the last time an array was put on Energy. They were due for replacement whether Guardians happened or not.
ppete1975
Well-Known Member
i was just thinking of the gravity building, and i came to realization that if they are going to have them then why not make them more interesting. Although its star trek so not disney heres an example you could make a gravity building the borg cube
or in disney world how about....
On that point.. i need a duck tales through the money bin roller coaster....
like many of us id rather not have them... and original disney was so good at disguising show buildings
but if we have to have ginormous ones.. why not make them either architecturally stunning (like original epcot) or make them tell a story.
Another example could be toy story... using a lunch box
or in disney world how about....
On that point.. i need a duck tales through the money bin roller coaster....
like many of us id rather not have them... and original disney was so good at disguising show buildings
but if we have to have ginormous ones.. why not make them either architecturally stunning (like original epcot) or make them tell a story.
Another example could be toy story... using a lunch box
ppete1975
Well-Known Member
and honestly it doesnt matter.. its the idea. Even if its just enough to run a tenth of the lights or even one light bulb its the idea that we can make a difference. So maybe somebody that sees them decides to install them at their house. Of course the original attraction was about energy so it made sense... but im sure when quill saw them when he was epcot when he was a kid he fell in love with them
James Norrie
Well-Known Member
That's kinda my point... Read further, you're almost there
ppete1975
Well-Known Member
there are some issues with building them over parking lots.. although i love the concept... for one... people would hit the support poles, it reduces parking spots, makes finding your car harder, and to a much lesser extent can increase theft and crime as there are more blind spots. They are doing them right currently, although on top of buildings is another great option. That gravity building could have them for one or any show building. Im just glad they havent tried wind, although the wildlife regulations might be part of that.
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
I read your whole post. Nobody is up in arms clamoring for the return of inefficient solar cells. The point is, whether they fit thematically or not, it's a whole decommissioned purpose built solar field. Even if it wasn't as efficient in it's later days, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be with new cells.