Even in the case of a very large installation it is still a drop in the dessert. It doesn't hurt general bio-diversity. Like what are you even talking about?
Thunderfoot covered it. Doesn't work. You increase your road infrastructure complexity by too much. There is even better lower hanging fruit (parking lots, building roofs), and until you fully saturate that lower hanging fruit it doesn't make sense.
Remember, returns on solar are tight. You want to spend as little money on mounting it as possible. Building pylons that can withstand a car crash, putting those pylons as far away from the road as possible to reduce driving hazards (even if they can withstand a car you almost don't want them to because that could kill people), then building a roof to span all of that where there wasn't one is not minimal mounting costs. There are places where some of those factors we want already exist without additional construction.
Of course some will say, but we make pylons like that all the time. Yeah, for expensive overpass infrastructure. Not for every mile of the road. You want to keep your standard road as cheap as possible, and you want to keep your solar mounted on the low hanging fruit all around you.
Chase the penguins. Cease the day. That's what I say, because I'm the coked up personality.
It doesn't need to be scripted to be that bad. Look into Kohlberg stages of moral development. https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html
These guys are locked into a stage where right and wrong are dependent only on the capacity to get in trouble for it.
A shockingly large number of people are in that same stage. Not just rapists. But drawn out interviews that show that they have categorically and consistent poor moral judgement aren't common.
They may also have complete mind blindness preventing them from understanding that other people's experiences exist. The longer you draw out an interview with people like that the more unreal it's going to seem.
That's what beginners think is the secret. The real secret is not holding people accountable and shielding them from litigious liability. Companies would regulate themselves if they had to pay for EVERYTHING the second they screw up.
I never claimed otherwise.
If they want it I'm for it.
But there is only one way to validate my assumptions.
And because of that we got a better president than the one we have currently. Did you know that historically high voter turnout precedes bad times.
The answer isn't to increase the democrat voter turnout. It's to decrease republican voter turnout. The fewer people vote the more the voters are composed only of high information voters and the more politicians have to talk to the public like we are actual fucking adults. That's good for the public no matter which party wins.
We are basically guaranteed to have about a 50:50 mix of republican and democrat control over time. The question is do you want them to be shit-tier democrats and republicans or high quality democrats and republicans?