▲ 82 ▼ The Battle Over Solar on Farmland | Agrivoltaics is either a green revolution or a poison pill for good land. Depends which farmers you ask. (www.motherjones.com) submitted 8 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/energy@slrpnk.net 18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 8 months ago (5 children) but then you also have a roof permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 points 8 months ago (4 children) To ... keep cars dry? Seems a bit like a waste. If you are going to be building something it would be far more beneficial to build a roof for a homeless shelter than a car park. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) the part of the homeless shelter that costs money isn’t the roof, so that’s a false dichotomy… not to mention loads of those kind of buildings already have PVs on the roof and being from australia, i definitely more thought heat than wet… but either way, id probably say not for the cars… its probably for the people going to and from the cars permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) better to build apartment blocks and then put panels on the roof of the apartment block and people have shops right there. industrial buildings however should be covered in panels ffs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 point 7 months ago That would mean A) buildings having a lot more weight on the walls then designed for, which could cause problems, B) Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare. 'Just put them in a field' is the correct take. I know we all want the solarpunk yogurt commercial world, but mundane things like ease of construction & maintenance win 9 times out of 10. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago again, that’s already all happening though… this is a “yes and” situation; there’s no or about it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 points 8 months ago (4 children) To ... keep cars dry? Seems a bit like a waste. If you are going to be building something it would be far more beneficial to build a roof for a homeless shelter than a car park. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) the part of the homeless shelter that costs money isn’t the roof, so that’s a false dichotomy… not to mention loads of those kind of buildings already have PVs on the roof and being from australia, i definitely more thought heat than wet… but either way, id probably say not for the cars… its probably for the people going to and from the cars permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) better to build apartment blocks and then put panels on the roof of the apartment block and people have shops right there. industrial buildings however should be covered in panels ffs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 point 7 months ago That would mean A) buildings having a lot more weight on the walls then designed for, which could cause problems, B) Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare. 'Just put them in a field' is the correct take. I know we all want the solarpunk yogurt commercial world, but mundane things like ease of construction & maintenance win 9 times out of 10. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago again, that’s already all happening though… this is a “yes and” situation; there’s no or about it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) the part of the homeless shelter that costs money isn’t the roof, so that’s a false dichotomy… not to mention loads of those kind of buildings already have PVs on the roof and being from australia, i definitely more thought heat than wet… but either way, id probably say not for the cars… its probably for the people going to and from the cars permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) better to build apartment blocks and then put panels on the roof of the apartment block and people have shops right there. industrial buildings however should be covered in panels ffs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 point 7 months ago That would mean A) buildings having a lot more weight on the walls then designed for, which could cause problems, B) Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare. 'Just put them in a field' is the correct take. I know we all want the solarpunk yogurt commercial world, but mundane things like ease of construction & maintenance win 9 times out of 10. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago again, that’s already all happening though… this is a “yes and” situation; there’s no or about it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) better to build apartment blocks and then put panels on the roof of the apartment block and people have shops right there. industrial buildings however should be covered in panels ffs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 point 7 months ago That would mean A) buildings having a lot more weight on the walls then designed for, which could cause problems, B) Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare. 'Just put them in a field' is the correct take. I know we all want the solarpunk yogurt commercial world, but mundane things like ease of construction & maintenance win 9 times out of 10. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago again, that’s already all happening though… this is a “yes and” situation; there’s no or about it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 point 7 months ago That would mean A) buildings having a lot more weight on the walls then designed for, which could cause problems, B) Maintenance would be an absolute nightmare. 'Just put them in a field' is the correct take. I know we all want the solarpunk yogurt commercial world, but mundane things like ease of construction & maintenance win 9 times out of 10. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 point 7 months ago again, that’s already all happening though… this is a “yes and” situation; there’s no or about it permalink fedilink source parent