- cross-posted to:
- environment
- Jah348 ( @Jah348@lemm.ee ) 12•1 year ago
It looks to me like a completely unnecessary solution. Covering up the water is a good idea, but find an immediate and cost affective way to do it. Loads of custom ineffectively laid out solar panels is not that.
It’s not as though we have a surplus of solar panels that need a place to go. If the money is being invested, place them in a location with them oriented toward the sun and not above water.
- oo1 ( @oo1@kbin.social ) 7•1 year ago
yeah fill up flat-roof buildings first - before even thinking about any of these wacko things.
it’s nearest to electricity demand so less distribution losses.
and access for maintenance is probably already there.- QuinceDaPence ( @QuinceDaPence@kbin.social ) 8•1 year ago
I’m absolutely down for solar covered parking lots though. Shaded parking + power.
- ciferecaNinjo ( @ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io ) 2•1 year ago
meh, #fuckCars… let them burn. I’d rather see solar covered cycling paths keeping cyclists dry. And solar covered bus/tram/train stop shelters, which could power the ETA display.
- QuinceDaPence ( @QuinceDaPence@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Much like the OP, doing solar in long strips like you would have to for cycling path presents some issues when it comes to the supporting electrical equipment, a square parking lot is a lot more condusive to it. As for tram stations, sure you could easily enough power it with panels but to be feeding into the grid with such a small amount of panels/station is probably not going to be cost effective (again) when it comes to the supporting equipment, especially when it’s right next to limitless power from the train lines.