this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2024
1034 points (98.4% liked)

196

16530 readers
2661 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 161 points 4 months ago (7 children)

The only reason I would be against this is because it disincentivizes removing large parking lots, which are primarily a waste of space. If we could replace some of that wasted space with housing (which could also have solar slapped on it) that would be ideal.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This picture/render looks like it's in Europe, where that could maybe be feasible. In the US, though, I think we need to take what we can get.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've seen this concept myself built in the Netherlands already, if I'm not mistaken

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Parking lots ain't going anywhere.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They are and they must. There is no path forward that doesn't massively disinvest from personal vehicles.

[–] TotallynotJessica 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They must, but they aren't. The infrastructure investments to make mass transit preferable in sprawling cities will not happen soon enough. The people in power will not compromise their worship of free markets for climate change. Over time, the market will transition that way, but not any faster under the current system.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

US auto-domination isn't even the result of market forces though.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of laissez-faire policy or capitalism in general, but government funded highway lanes are no more capitalist than government funded rail tracks. The current situation in the US required enormous government intervention to establish, in the form of the forced seizure of property to make way for highways, hundreds of billions of dollars (inflation adjusted) to build those highways, mandatory parking minimums for new construction (to store all the cars from the highway), government subsidies for suburban style development and later on tax schemes that resulted in poorer inner city areas subsidizing wealthy suburbs, and zoning laws that made it illegal to build a business in a residential area (which worked together with anti-loitering laws to make it so that if you didn't live in a neighborhood you had no "legitimate" reason to be there. It's not a coincidence this happened in the wake of desegregation.)

Similarly fossil fuel production in the US actually receives direct government subsidies at the federal and sometimes state level (some of which have been in effect since 1916).

Now, we can get into the weeds and talk about how government action is actually a necessary part of capitalism and the intertwined nature of power structures and so on and so forth, but it's important to remember that there's nothing inevitable or natural about the mess we're in right now, as some would have you believe. It required conscious planning and choices, as well as tremendous effort and tremendous injustice to get here.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

My comment specified large parking lots for a reason. The amount of space wasted around seldom used, high volume areas (like stadiums) is absurd, and other countries have shown they’re much better served by increased public transit, not giant parking lots that sit empty 300+ days of the year.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Treczoks 108 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Depends. Some agro-PV systems I have seen are 50% transparent. The plants get a sufficient amount of light, and are protected from hail and heavy rain.

I have even seen a prototype where the pillars for the panels incorporate a rail system on which sowing, weeding, and harvesting tools can run electrically in instead of being pulled by a tractor.

[–] ChicoSuave 69 points 4 months ago (1 children)

PV coverings also trap some ambient heat and regulate the surface temperature better than full exposure, acting like a greenhouse that encourages plant growth.

Folks so set on zero sum systems that they ignore synergies.

[–] TotallynotJessica 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Most of the growth in solar has been market driven. It's why Texas has a lot of solar despite them subsidizing oil and gas. It's free, plentiful energy that hits the ground almost every day. If you have boatloads of land that's not ideal for farming, yet not too hot for much of the year, it makes economic sense.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 69 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (9 children)

The amount of area needed for solar does not even begin to approach the amount of farm land. People generally aren’t building solar panels on farmland anyways? The largest instillations in the US are in the middle of the fucking desert.

Also get rid of as many parking lots as possible.

There is just so many layers of false and absurd narrative in this.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] veganpizza69 67 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Plastering agricultural land with parking lots and suburban sprawl is a crime against humanity. This wasteful land use needs to end.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife 19 points 4 months ago

I've done a ton of biking in my area over the last 15 years, and it's been depressing seeing how much former farmland and unused wild area is getting gobbled up by the fucking McMansions and "high 700s" McTownhouses. The townhouses are especially sad - like, you're out in the middle of fucking nowhere (no town in sight) and yet you're jammed in with neighbors on both walls?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil 55 points 4 months ago

Sort of a lemons-into-lemonade situation. But maybe we shouldn't have paved over prime agricultural land to make parking lots to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Serious question. Why would it ever need to be one or the other?

There's already solar panels on "prime agricultural land", so what? Land use for solar/green power is so small right now, we shouldn't be trying to regulate where it can't be installed.... Put it everywhere.

On your house, above parking lots, on the rooftops of large warehouses... If there's a surface that's exposed to the sun for 5-8 hours a day, put that shit there. Unless there's a good, practical reason not to...

IDK seems a lot like a false dichotomy to me.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"we don't want solar panels on farmland" is just a conservative talking point. It's not actually a problem, but it's something that resonates with their boomer voter base.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I live near a school playground in Vancouver. In the summer the kids don't use it because it's too hot and sunny. In the winter kids don't use it because it's wet.

I feel like a solar panel canopy would be 3 birds with one stone.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago

Yess, vancouverite here also. How do we get our municipalities to do projects like this? There's so much space that would be perfect real estate for solar canopies

[–] [email protected] 48 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Not all agriculture is done in full sun. Ginseng, coffee and other important crops do best in shade. And you can put the panels up on grazing land. The critters often appreciate the shade which approximates a savanna environment.

[–] Fried_out_Kombi 34 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

And things like vertical bifacial solar panels can work especially amazingly on grazing land that isn't suitable for crops.

Counter-intuitive as they may look, they actually have a number of benefits:

  1. The panels face east and west, meaning they generate peak power in the morning and evening, which corresponds to peak demand => less need for energy storage to bridge the gap between the mid-day peak in production from traditional PV and the aforementioned morning and evening demand peaks.
  2. The panels are vertical, which makes them easier and cheaper to maintain, as dust, snow, and rain naturally shed from their surfaces.
  3. The panels get less direct energy during mid-day, keeping their surfaces cooler. Turns out cooler solar panels are more efficient at converting light energy into electrical energy.
  4. The arrangement lends itself very naturally to agrivoltaics, which means you can derive more yields from a given piece of land and use less land overall than if you had segregated uses.
  5. The compatibility with agrivoltaics allows farmers to diversify their incomes streams and/or become energy self-sufficient.
[–] whereisk 9 points 4 months ago

The vast majority of the benefit comes from the fact that they are bifacial not vertical.

In fact depending on the weather a standard mount but with bifacial panels will outperform the vertical.

This guy here does a very thorough comparison.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 46 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Is it prime agriculture land if no one is using it for prime agricultural land?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Yes.

Land use doesn't determine baseline soil quality, but soil quality often determines land use.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Certain crops can benefit think from some shade throughout the day:

The study aggregates the effect of agrivoltaics on crop yields at different sites. Tomatoes saw up to double yield with agrivoltaics, while wheat, cucumbers, potatoes and lettuce showed significant negative impacts and corn and grapes showed minimal impact.

I assume that maximal crop output would happen if you just grow things in their optimal climate, but then you rely more heavily on transportation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

Agrivoltaics are so cool!

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] SkunkWorkz 37 points 4 months ago (3 children)

You can install solar panels on agricultural land and still farm on it. You just need to install the panels vertically. It’s called agrivoltaics. The photovoltaic cells can actually produce electricity when they are exposed from either side. It’s just that normal solar panels are opaque on the bottoms side. So for a vertical installation you have to use bifacial panels which are transparent on the other side. And the drop in efficiency in a vertical installation isn’t much compared to a traditional installation, since both sides of one panel now produce electricity, even the shaded side that is only exposed to ambient light produces electricity. And they are much more efficient during their peak hours, since it’s much cooler during sunset and sunrise then the middle of the day. PV panels are less efficient when they get hot.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/agrivoltaics-2666910628

https://youtu.be/LqizLQDi9BM

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Every installation has benefits and drawbacks:

  • If you have humans walking below PV, you must prevent parts falling down
  • The support must be quite wide, requiring more expensive carrying members
  • Constrains traffic
  • Cars are protected from hail and heat (good for car factories!)
  • Makes electricity where it's needed
  • Very visible progress toward renewables

France made it mandatory for large malls to install these btw.

[–] madcaesar 14 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The first two "cons" seem like non issues, and could be used for any structure ever.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

you must prevent parts falling down

So like any ceiling with HVAC, etc? I was thinking that the coverings were a boon to pedestrians due to the shade they provide on hot days (depends on location, of course)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Or even better: banning all single story parking lots to have less sealed area. Then putting solar panels above the unsealed area and allowing nature to own everything below the solar panels, instead of agricultural conglomerates who pollute the ground water and produce food for livestock.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Bonus effect is it helps keep customers cars at a cooler temperature

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

When solar farms are more than like 0.01% of land utilization then maybe its worth caring about.

For the same land you can power a household or get like 14 pounds of beef. who cares.

Just install solar panels where its cheapest, which is going to be an empty field where you can install a ton and get better labor efficiency during the install. Making green energy more expensive to install only benefits fossil fuel companies.

back of napkin math

Average household is about 10000 kWh annually Solar farms conservatively produce 350MWh/year/acre

so 1/35 of an acre to power a home

roughly 3000 pounds of soybeans per acre becomes roughly 500 pounds of beef/acre.

500*(1/35) = 14.2


load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Depends. Are there lots of tall buildings around the parking lot? Solar panels are made of a lot of rare metals and so we have to be very selective about where we install them to maximize energy output. For this region large open spaces near the equator work well. Not that they can't work elsewhere, or couldn't work over a parking lot, but there's a lot of variables that have to be considered on each individual level.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Solar panels are made of a lot of rare metals

Rare Earth Metals aren't actually that rare, although they do tend to be concentrated in countries outside our traditional western sphere of influence. We're seeing a lot of political wrangling in South America and Central Africa, precisely because countries like Bolivia and the Democratic Republic of Congo have an outsized stock of these minerals. In fact, a big part of the conflict in Rwanda along their border with the Congo stems from illegal mining and black market export of minerals, and the subsequent criminal cartelization that's sprung up around this traffic.

there’s a lot of variables that have to be considered on each individual level

If you're talking about a globally coordinated geo-engineering project to maximize solar electricity production, then yes - building a big band of solar plants inside the Tropics zone would yield the biggest band for buck. But then moving that electricity out again becomes a challenge, particularly if you're trying to get it to mega-cities like NYC or Tokyo or London or Beijing.

If you're just trying to generate local green power in Ohio, without running massive HVDC lines all the way down to the Yucatan Peninsula, then covering the Browns Stadium or the JACK Cleveland Casino in solar panels is as good a use of solar infrastructure as anything.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RyanLiu 15 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You know what parking lots actually are? Land that investors bought and they're waiting for the housing prices to go even higher before then build another empty residential high-rise over it. No sense putting solar panels on a parking lot that's gonna be gone in a few years.

[–] yokonzo 28 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, you know those Walmart hi rises popping up everywhere

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Roofed parking would be pretty sick, compared to having your car baked through in the sun. But multi-story parking decks would be even better, or even just parking lots with trees.

It's not like we're actually short on space to build solar panels on. We already have lots of roofs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago

Yeah, plastering parking lots over prime agricultural land was definitely a mistake. And it's hard to wind that back. We just need to make sure new infrastructure and planning reduces car dependency rather than further entrenching it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

To be honest, i dont think we have large enough parking lots where i live. Only at the airport have i seen pretty large ones and we have 3 of those in my country

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Parking lots, warehouses, malls, walmarts (and similar superstores), even stretches of in-city highways. There's millions of acres of viable space for solar panels, just no financial incentive to install and maintain it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] thermal_shock 10 points 4 months ago (5 children)

USA has vast, seas of parking lots. makes 1000% sense to have them here.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago

I would imagine a nice bonus of having solar panels on top of parking lots is cars staying cooler in the shade

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Improved wool output on farms with solar panels Edit: Carparks also make great places for solar panels. Especially if they can charge the cars.

load more comments
view more: next ›