Some thoughts on Roe

The hot topic at the moment is the recent “repeal” of Roe v. Wade by the US Supreme Court. This topic involves not only legal, but also moral, social, and scientific issues. This blog being a science blog, it’s appropriate to comment on the scientific issues here, and to that end I have produced the chart of human prenatal development above. Horizontal bars show fetal size on a logarithmic scale, and the two images are from Wikimedia and from USAID. Confusingly, two time scales are in regular use for prenatal development, one starting at the last menstrual period, and the other at fertilisation (around 2 weeks later). The chart shows both.

Roe v. Wade had, in fact, largely been overturned by Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. The majority of people in the US (around 63%) believe that abortion should be legal in some cases but illegal in others (although views vary widely between demographic groups and from state to state). Roe v. Wade claimed a constitutional right to an abortion based on a constitutional right to privacy, and attempted to draw a cutoff for abortion legality based on the trimester of pregnancy:

  1. “For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician.
  2. “For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
  3. “For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.”

Planned Parenthood v. Casey rejected both of these ideas, grounding a right to abortion instead in the due process clause of the 14th Amendment (“nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”), and drawing a new legal line solely based on viability (the age at which the unborn baby can survive outside the womb) rather than on “Roe’s rigid trimester framework.”


The Supreme Court of the United States: the Roberts Court

Viability has some appeal as a guideline, since many people consider it problematic to kill an unborn baby which could be delivered by caesarean and then cared for successfully in the neonatal intensive care unit down the hall. However, as the recent judgement by the Roberts Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization notes, viability “is heavily dependent on factors – such as medical advances and the availability of quality medical care – that have nothing to do with the characteristics of a fetus.” In fact, the viability threshold has been dropping at around a week per decade, sitting now at around 22 or 23 weeks (see the chart). Dobbs also took issue with the constitutional aspects of the decision in Casey, overturning it (and what was left of Roe), so that “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.” Some of “the people” have been very happy about this, while others have protested.

Another scientific (or rather, technological) issue relevant to the decision in Dobbs has been the widespread use of obstetric ultrasonography in the United States. Janelle Taylor notes that “the obstetrical exam has come to incorporate rituals of showing and telling and giving out pictures” (we have all seen them on Facebook). Such images have greatly influenced how the fetus is viewed by the population at large. Unsurprisingly, such images have also lent support to pro-life campaigners, since they give a very clear face to the unborn. This article in The Atlantic notes that “in recent years, pro-life activists have been more successful in using that tool [scientific evidence] to shift the terms of the policy debate.”

More complex has been the debate on whether the unborn human can feel pain. Even in adults, pain is complex, with two separate human pain systems, one more precisely localised, and the other more affective (it “hurts” more). No real scientific consensus currently exists on when a fetus can feel pain (indeed, how could you really prove a hypothesis here?). Various stages are reported in the literature, some as early as 14 weeks, and this literature has been heavily cited as part of the ethical debate on abortion. Other writers have, rather disturbingly, suggested that only adult human beings can truly feel pain. The debate in the US and elsewhere is ongoing.


Pi Day!

Pi Day is coming up again (3/14 as a US date). The number π is, of course, 3.14159265… Here are some possible activities for children:

  • Search for your birthday (or any other number) in the digits of π
  • Follow in the footsteps of Archimedes, showing that π is between 22/7 = 3.1429 and 223/71 = 3.1408.
  • Calculate 333/106 = 3.1415 and 355/113 = 3.1415929, which are better approximations than 22/7.
  • Measure the circumference and diameter of a round plate and divide. Use a ruler to measure the diameter and a strip of paper (afterwards measured with a ruler) for the circumference. For children who cannot yet divide, try to find a plate with diameter 7, 106, or 113.
  • Calculate π by measuring the area of a circle (most simply, with radius 10 or 100), using A = πr2. An easy way is to draw an appropriate circle on a sheet of graph paper.

You can also try estimating π using Buffon’s needle. You will need some toothpicks (or similar) of length k and some parallel lines (such as floorboards) a distance d apart (greater than or equal to k). Then the fraction of dropped toothpicks that touch or cross a line will be 2 k / (π d), or 2 / π if k = d. There is an explanation and simulator here (see also the picture below). And, of course, you can bake a celebratory pie and listen to Kate Bush singing π, mostly correctly!

This picture by McZusatz has 11 of 17 matches touching a line, suggesting the value of 2×17/11 = 3.1 for π (since k = d).

Actually, of course, π = 3.1415926535 8979323846 2643383279 5028841971 6939937510 5820974944 5923078164 0628620899 8628034825 3421170679 8214808651 3282306647 0938446095 5058223172 5359408128 … (digits in red are sung by Kate Bush, accurately, although some have said otherwise).


Six new solar cars

For solar car fans, here are six newly revealed cars. They will race at one or both of:

SCM  NL  Vattenfall Solar Team (Delft) 

Three-wheel (outrigger) challenger (new car: Nuna11) – this year will be the last year that Delft partners with Vattenfall. Starting in 2022, Brunel will be their main sponsor. They have been recruiting for the 2022 Sasol Solar Challenge, and will also race in Morocco. Their new car features an asymmetrical top surface (to create more downforce on the left wheel), a new motor cntroller (suitable for hills), and a LiFePO4 battery.


Credit (click image to zoom)

iESC  SCM  NL  Top Dutch Solar Racing 

Challenger (new car: Green Spirit) – they are hoping to race their new car in Morocco.


Credit (click image to zoom)

iESC  SCM  BE  Agoria Solar Team / KU Leuven 

Three-wheel (tadpole) challenger (new car: BluePoint Atlas) – they have built a new car to defend their title. It is named after the Atlas Mountains.


Credit (click image to zoom)

iESC  SCM  NL  Solar Team Twente 

Three-wheel (tadpole) challenger (new car: Red Horizon) – they have built a three-wheeler this year, and will race both at Zolder and in Morocco.


Credit (click image to zoom)

iESC  SCM  DE  Sonnenwagen Aachen 

Three-wheel (outrigger) challenger (new car: Covestro Photon) – this team did very well in 2019, in spite of being blown off the road. They are excited about racing at Zolder again. They will race 2 cars at Zolder: the new car (7) and the previous car (70).


Credit (click image to zoom)

iESC  TR  Solar Team Solaris (Dokuz Eylül University) 

Challenger (new car: S11) – they missed the last ESC, but hope to attend the next one with their new car.


Credit (click image to zoom)


Eurovision Song Contest and GDP

Following up on my previous post and the one before that, here is some more analysis of Eurovision Song Contest voting for this year. There are some interesting correlations between national tele-votes (not jury votes) and demographic variables, especially per capita GDP. As the map above shows, this is essentially a proxy for the northwest–southeast axis.

Iceland came 4th with the song 10 Years in spite of never actually competing; a positive COVID-19 test result restricted the band to their hotel; and they were judged based on a tape of their rehearsal performance. The richer Nordic countries seem to have been especially generous in this situation (see chart below).

Conversely, the winning song from Italy received generally lower tele-votes from the richer countries (I am not entirely sure why):

The song Je me casse from Malta came 7th overall. As with Iceland, the higher tele-votes came from the richer countries, although the pattern here is fuzzier than for Iceland. There are also some notable outliers: the Australian tele-vote of 8 for Malta probably reflects the 176,000 people of Maltese descent living in Australia.

Russia shows a pattern somewhat similar to Italy (p < 0.004, R2 = 22%), but this is simply because the former Soviet countries that vote for Russia are also the poorer ones. A better predictor can be obtained by counting Russian expatriates (p < 0.001, R2 = 44%).

And finally, here is a plot of tele-vote totals against jury vote totals. They differ substantially:


Eurovision Song Contest: More Analysis

Following up on my previous post, here is some more analysis of Eurovision Song Contest voting for this year. The maps above show a hierarchical clustering analysis on tele-voting (above) and jury voting (below), based on calculating simple Euclidean distance between vote vectors and on an assumption that countries would give themselves 12 points if they could. Some key differences between the four main clusters are highlighted in colour (note that Azerbaijan, Israel, the Netherlands, and the UK clustered alone or in a pair):

Tele-voting cluster 1 (green)

Countries: Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and Ukraine.

Average votes:  Italy:  8, Iceland:  8, Ukraine:  8, Finland:  8, Lithuania:  8, France:  6, Switzerland:  4, Sweden:  4, Norway:  4, Malta:  2, Russia:  2, Serbia:  1, Belgium:  1, Albania:  1, Germany:  1, Greece:  0, Cyprus:  0, and Moldova:  0.

Tele-voting cluster 2 (purple)

Countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, North Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, and Switzerland.

Average votes:  Italy:  10, Serbia:  10, France:  8, Switzerland:  6, Ukraine:  6, Finland:  5, Iceland:  4, Russia:  2, Bulgaria:  2, Greece:  2, Azerbaijan:  2, Albania:  2, Spain:  2, Malta:  1, Lithuania:  1, Portugal:  1, Cyprus:  1, and Moldova:  0.

Tele-voting cluster 3 (red)

Countries: Albania, Czech Republic, France, Moldova, Portugal, and Romania.

Average votesMoldova:  10, Ukraine:  9, Italy:  8, France:  8, Switzerland:  6, Finland:  4, Greece:  4, Russia:  3, Portugal:  3, Iceland:  2, Sweden:  2, Albania:  2, Lithuania:  1, Bulgaria:  1, Israel:  1, Azerbaijan:  1, Serbia:  0, and Cyprus:  0.

Tele-voting cluster 4 (yellow)

Countries: Cyprus, Georgia, Greece, Russia, and San Marino.

Average votes:  Italy:  10, Greece:  9, Cyprus:  9, France:  7, Ukraine:  6, Finland:  4, Russia:  4, San Marino:  4, Lithuania:  3, Switzerland:  2, Bulgaria:  2, Moldova:  2, Azerbaijan:  2, Malta:  1, Albania:  1, Iceland:  0, and Serbia:  0.

Check out the disputed songs: Iceland: 10 Years, Lithuania: Discoteque, Serbia: Loco Loco, Moldova: Sugar, Greece: Last Dance, and Cyprus: El diablo.

The map below shows jury voting. For jury voting, there were only two substantial clusters (i.e. containing 4 or more countries – Albania, Malta, Romania, France, Israel, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, and Italy clustered alone or in small clusters of 2 or 3 countries).

Jury voting cluster 1 (purple)

Countries: Australia, Austria, Croatia, Czech, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, NM, Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine, and UK.

Average votesSwitzerland:  9, Iceland:  8, France:  7, Italy:  6, Malta:  4, Bulgaria:  4, Portugal:  4, Ukraine:  3, Finland:  3, Lithuania:  2, Russia:  2, Israel:  2, Belgium:  2, Greece:  1, Sweden:  1, Serbia:  1, Cyprus:  1, Azerbaijan:  1, San Marino:  1, Netherlands:  1, Spain:  1, Germany:  1, UK:  1, and Moldova:  0.

Jury voting cluster 2 (red)

Countries: Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Moldova, Russia, and San Marino.

Average votesGreece:  9, Moldova:  8, Malta:  7, Bulgaria:  7, Italy:  6, France:  6, Russia:  6, Cyprus:  4, Azerbaijan:  4, San Marino:  3, Portugal:  2, Belgium:  2, Switzerland:  1, Iceland:  1, Ukraine:  1, Finland:  1, Lithuania:  1, Sweden:  1, Israel:  1, and Spain:  1.

Check out the disputed songs: Switzerland: Tout l’Univers, Iceland: 10 Years, Greece: Last Dance, and Moldova: Sugar


Eurovision Song Contest 2021

The Eurovision Song Contest has been on again (strangely, Australia is now part of Europe). On the whole, I didn’t think much of the songs this year, although there were a few gems (like the French entry).

This (revised) chart shows those tele-votes which were surprisingly high, given the total scores (country colours indicate total scores, with grey for non-finalists). Arrows reflect high tele-votes (in a relative sense). Red arrows reflect particularly high tele-votes (in a relative sense), including:

  • Austria, Croatia, North Macedonia (NM), Slovenia, and Switzerland Serbia (Balkan cluster)
  • North Macedonia (NM) and Italy Albania (ditto)
  • Cyprus Greece Cyprus (as usual)
  • Netherlands Greece (the Greek singer resides in the Netherlands)
  • Georgia Greece
  • Russia Cyprus
  • Moldova Russia (former USSR)
  • Czech Republic and Romania Moldova
  • Latvia, Germany, Norway, UK, and Ireland Lithuania
  • Denmark and Iceland Sweden (Nordic cluster)
  • Sweden, Iceland, and Estonia Finland (ditto)
  • Malta Norway
  • Azerbaijan Israel

Regional sentiment and expatriate voting still play a part, I see. Here is the same network overlaid on a map:


Zhurong on Mars

For people asking “Where are the pictures of China’s Zhurong rover?” – it’s still early days. Above is a timeline comparison with NASA’s Perseverance. Testing processes take time – Perseverance did not start driving until 15 days after arrival. And apparently Zhurong’s initial uplink speed was only 16 bit/s.

As I understand the schedule, Zhurong will roll off the lander on 22 May, and the rover and lander will photograph each other on 27 May.

Update #1: the Zhurong rover has now established a higher-bandwidth uplink via the Tianwen-1 orbiter, so sending photos taken by the lander is now technically feasible.

Update #2: photographs have now been released (rover on left and view down descent ramp on right):


International Nurses Day 2021

May 12 is International Nurses Day, a day which marks the contributions that nurses make all around the world. The day is in fact the birthday of Florence Nightingale, who built on the work of Christian nuns to found the nursing profession as we know it today.

Florence Nightingale’s work was among the wounded of the Crimean War, so our montage for this year has a military flavour, but it also hints at the vast range of healthcare activities that other nurses carry out. Happy Nurses Day to all nurses!

In the photograph, from top left:


Exciting Australian solar car update

Here is a list of 7 active Australian solar car teams. Although the World Solar Challenge has been cancelled, several Australian teams hope to run an Aussie Solar Challenge in October at Wakefield Park near Goulburn, NSW (). That is very exciting news! The format of the event appears to be rather like the iESC.


Sasol  AU  Adelaide University Solar Racing Team 

Challenger (new car: Lumen III) – They are hoping to attend the 2021 Aussie Solar Challenge (AuSC).

Previously, Adelaide came 21st at WSC 15; participated at WSC 17; and came 16th at WSC 19.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

14  AU  Flinders University 

Two-seat cruiser (Investigator Mk 3) – they were planning to improve aerodynamics, reduce weight, and make some other changes. They have taken an unusual approach to the motor. They will not be racing at AuSC.

Previously, Flinders participated in the WSC 17 Cruiser class and participated in the WSC 19 Cruiser class.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

15  Sasol  AU  Western Sydney Solar Team 

Challenger (new car) – but they plan to attend AuSC with their ASC-winning 2017 catamaran Unlimited 2.

Previously, WSU came 11th at WSC 13; came 10th at WSC 15; came 6th at WSC 17; came 20th at WSC 19; and won ASC 18.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: Anthony Dekker (click images to zoom)

30  Sasol  AU  Team Arrow 

Cruiser – They are hoping to attend the 2021 Aussie Solar Challenge (AuSC).

Previously, Arrow came 7th at WSC 13; came 8th at WSC 15; came 3rd in the WSC 17 Cruiser class; participated in the WSC 19 Adventure class; came 5th at Abu Dhabi 15; and came 8th at iESC 18. Their team number (30) is the average age of people on the original team.


picture credit (click image to zoom – OLD PIC)

41  Sasol  AU  Australian National University 

Three-wheel challenger (new car) – They are hoping to attend the 2021 Aussie Solar Challenge (AuSC).

Previously, ANU participated at WSC 17 and participated at WSC 19.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

75  Sasol  AU  Sunswift (University of New South Wales) 

Cruiser (new car) – They are hoping to attend the 2021 Aussie Solar Challenge (AuSC).

Previously, Sunswift came 3rd in the WSC 13 Cruiser class; came 4th in the WSC 15 Cruiser class; participated in the WSC 17 Cruiser class; and came 2nd in the WSC 19 Cruiser class.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

960  AU  Deakin University / ACCIONA (Ascend) 

Two-seat cruiser (new team with car: Ascend) – they will not be racing at AuSC.


picture credit (click image to zoom)

This page last updated 18:00 on 13 August 2021 AEST.


Exciting European solar car update

This list is obsolete; new version is here.

Here is a list of 18 European teams from 12 countries (including Turkey and Morocco) – 11 Challengers and 7 Cruisers – intending to race in two major upcoming solar car events in the region this year. These events are:

  • iESC  iLumen European Solar Challenge        (16–19 September): Top Dutch, Aachen, Agoria, Onda, Bochum, Twente, Nottingham, SER, ITU, Eindhoven, Lodz, Solaris, PUT, and Cluj
  • SCM  Solar Challenge Morocco (23–29 October): Solaride, Delft, Top Dutch, Aachen, Agoria, Twente, Chalmers, Mines Rabat, and others – NEW EVENT

In other recent news, several new cars have been revealed.


SCM  EE  Solaride  

Two-seat cruiser (new team) – this new team from Estonia hopes to build a Cruiser. They are based in the city of Tartu.


picture credit (click image to zoom)

SCM  NL  Vattenfall Solar Team (Delft) 

Three-wheel (outrigger) challenger (new car: Nuna11) – this year will be the last year that Delft partners with Vattenfall. Starting in 2022, Brunel will be their main sponsor. They have been recruiting for the 2022 Sasol Solar Challenge, and will also race in Morocco. Their new car features an asymmetrical top surface (to create more downforce on the left wheel), a new motor controller (suitable for hills), and a LiFePO4 battery.

Previously, Delft won WSC 13; won WSC 15; won WSC 17; came 12th at WSC 19; won SASOL 14; won SASOL 16; and won SASOL 18. Their team number (3) is a long-standing tradition.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

iESC  SCM  NL  Top Dutch Solar Racing 

Challenger (new car: Green Spirit) – they are hoping to race their new car in Morocco.

Previously, Top Dutch came 4th at WSC 19 and came 3rd at iESC 20.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

iESC  SCM  DE  Sonnenwagen Aachen 

Three-wheel (outrigger) challenger (new car: Covestro Photon) – this team did very well in 2019, in spite of being blown off the road. They are excited about racing at Zolder again. They will race 2 cars at Zolder: the new car (7) and the previous car (70). In Morocco they will race as number 7.

Previously, Aachen participated at WSC 17; came 6th at WSC 19; came 3rd at iESC 18; and came 5th and 8th at iESC 20. Their usual team number (70) is the number they raced with in 2017.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

iESC  SCM  BE  Agoria Solar Team / KU Leuven 

Three-wheel (tadpole) challenger (new car: BluePoint Atlas) – they have built a new car to defend their title. It is named after the Atlas Mountains.

Previously, Agoria came 6th at WSC 13; came 5th at WSC 15; came 3rd at WSC 17; won WSC 19; came 3rd at Abu Dhabi 15; came 2nd at iESC 16; came 6th at iESC 18; came 1st and 6th at iESC 20; and won Carrera Solar Atacama 18. Their team number (8) is a long-standing tradition.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

iESC  IT  Onda Solare 

Four-seat cruiser (Emilia 4 LT) – they won the American Solar Challenge (Cruiser class) in 2018, and they have written up their design process here, but they have since made substantial improvements to the vehicle, including to the aerodynamics, suspension, battery, and solar panels. There is also an unusual open tail.

Previously, Onda came 10th at WSC 13; participated in the WSC 19 Cruiser class; won the ASC 18 Cruiser class; came 10th at Abu Dhabi 15; and came 6th at iESC 16. Their team number (9) is taken from the SS 9, the highway through Bologna, which was once the Roman Via Aemilia (hence also the name of their vehicle).

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

11  iESC  DE  Hochschule Bochum Solar Car Team 

Two-seat cruiser (thyssenkrupp SunRiser) – for the 2019 World Solar Challenge, Bochum improved their sexy 2-seater SunRiser, which came 3rd in 2015. They also have a solar buggy team. Their current plans appear to involve a hybrid solar-hydrogen vehicle. They will race two cars at older (11 and 42).

Previously, Bochum came 2nd in the WSC 13 Cruiser class; came 3rd in the WSC 15 Cruiser class; came 2nd in the WSC 17 Cruiser class; came 4th in the WSC 19 Cruiser class; came 3rd, 4th, and 5th at iESC 16; came 2nd, 3rd, and 5th in the iESC 18 Cruiser class; came 1st and 7th at Albi Eco 18; and came 1st and 2nd at Albi Eco 19.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: Anthony Dekker (click images to zoom)

21  iESC  SCM  NL  Solar Team Twente 

Three-wheel (tadpole) challenger (new car: Red Horizon) – they have built a three-wheeler this year, and will race both at Zolder and in Morocco.

Previously, Twente came 3rd at WSC 13; came 2nd at WSC 15; came 5th at WSC 17; came 17th at WSC 19; won iESC 16; came 1st and 2nd at iESC 18; and came 2nd and 4th at iESC 20. Their team number (21) is a pun and a wish for success in the race (“Twente-One”).

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

23  iESC  GB  University of Nottingham Solar Racing Team 

Cruiser (new team) – their rather radical approach is to modify a Renault Twizy to have solar panels and improved electrics.


public domain photo

31  iESC  CH  Solar Energy Racers 

Asymmetric challenger (new car: SER-4) – they raced their SER-3 in South Africa and Australia. They still have their SER-2, and they are also building a new car.

Previously, SER came 5th at WSC 13; came 15th at WSC 19; came 2nd at ASC 16; came 11th at Abu Dhabi 15; came 3rd at SASOL 18; and came 8th at iESC 16.

 
Left: credit / Right: Anthony Dekker (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

34  iESC  TR  Istanbul Technical University (ITU) 

Challenger (new car: Ariba X) – they discuss their plans here.

Previously, ITU came 17th at WSC 13; participated at WSC 17; came 7th at iESC 16; and came 7th at iESC 20.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom – OLD PICS)

40  iESC  NL  Solar Team Eindhoven 

Cruiser (new car) – after building four “solar family cars,” their focus for 2021 is a Self-sustaining House On Wheels. However, they are also racing two cars at Zolder (5 and 40).

Previously, Eindhoven won the WSC 13 Cruiser class; won the WSC 15 Cruiser class; won the WSC 17 Cruiser class; won the WSC 19 Cruiser class; came 7th in the iESC 18 Cruiser class; and came 1st and 2nd in the iESC 20 Cruiser class. Their team number (40) is the Eindhoven telephone area code.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

45  iESC  PL  Lodz Solar Team 

Four-seat cruiser (Eagle Two) – this team has some nice (Polish) news coverage here. They are working on improving their car.

Previously, Lodz participated in the WSC 15 Cruiser class; participated in the WSC 17 Cruiser class; participated in the WSC 19 Cruiser class; came 5th at SASOL 16; and won the iESC 18 Cruiser class. Their team number (45) is a tradition since 2015.

 
Left: Anthony Dekker / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

51  SCM  SE  Chalmers Solar Team 

Three-wheel (tadpole) challenger (new car: Sköll) – they were the first Challenger-class team to reveal a render for their new car.

Previously, Chalmers came 21st at WSC 19 and participated at Swedish Solar Race 21.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

77  SCM  MA  Mines Rabat Solar Team 

Asymmetric challenger (new car: Eleadora 2) – they have worked hard to complete this car (see this video).

Previously, Mines Rabat participated at MSRC 19.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

81  iESC  TR  Solar Team Solaris (Dokuz Eylül University) 

Challenger (new car: S11) – they missed the last ESC, but hope to attend the next one with their new car.

Previously, Solaris participated in the WSC 13 Adventure class; came 25th at WSC 15; came 18th at WSC 19; came 9th at iESC 16; came 2nd at Albi Eco 18; and came 2nd at MSRC 19.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

88  iESC  PL  PUT Solar Dynamics (Poznań University of Technology) 

Two-seat cruiser (new team with car: Klara) – they have revealed their car, which weighs 750 kg and has an 18.5 kWh battery. This (Polish) video describes their project.

 
Left: credit / Right: credit (click images to zoom)

99  iESC  RO  TU Cluj-Napoca Solar Racing Team

Challenger (new team with car: SolisEV-1) – this is a brand-new team from Cluj-Napoca in Romania. They appear to have no online presence at all, and I have extremely grave doubts about their participation (although their institution does have a Formula Student team).


public domain photo

This page last updated 10:56 on 19 August 2021 AEST.