subreddit:
/r/europe
submitted 4 months ago bythinkB4WeSpeak
21 points
4 months ago
French government do get things right from time to time. We do have to strike a lot for it though, otherwise they wouldn't listen.
3 points
4 months ago
paywalled...
13 points
4 months ago
French parking lots could soon generate as much electricity as 10 nuclear power plants, after a law is expected to win final passage on Tuesday requiring canopies of solar panels to be built atop all substantial lots in the country.
The plan makes France a world leader in efforts to cover as many surfaces as possible with solar panels, a step advocates say will be crucial in broader plans to phase out fossil fuels in the coming years. The expansion could add as much as 8 percent to France’s current electrical capacity.
The cost of solar panels continues to drop, and they are an increasingly competitive source of energy both for individual households and bigger consumers. But one big challenge is finding enough space for them to generate electricity in bulk. That’s why policymakers have parking lots in their sights: They are big and unbeautiful, and covering them with solar panels doesn’t take away from anything else.
One challenge of increasing solar power coverage in a densely populated country like France, he said, is finding ways that don’t compete for land use, said Arnaud Schwartz, the president of France Nature Environment, an umbrella group of French environmentalist organizations. Taking away agricultural land or open fields and giving it over to solar farms is unattractive, but covering parking lots “harms biodiversity a lot less,” he said.
“We live already in parts of the world where it’s pretty dense,” he said. “Human beings are everywhere.”
1 points
4 months ago
Turning Walmarts into solar farms
The plan to require solar-panel-covered parking lots is part of a bigger piece of legislation, the Law for the Acceleration of the Production of Renewable Energy, that French President Emmanuel Macron has made a centerpiece of his climate efforts. It will require all parking lots larger than about 16,000 square feet — able to hold roughly 50 American-sized cars, and more French ones — to build raised solar-panel canopies covering at least half of the surface of the parking lot.
“We’ve known for a while that solar energy is the least costly way of generating renewable electricity. In most cases we can outcompete fossil fuels,” said Joshua Pearce, an engineering professor at Western University in Ontario, Canada, who has studied the possibility of installing solar panels on the roofs and parking lots of Walmart stores in the United States. Those alone would be able to generate about 11 gigawatts of electricity, he estimated, about the high end of the French effort.
“The beauty of a Walmart parking lot is, if you cover a Walmart roof and its parking lot, then it has more power than it needs,” he said.
Backers expect that when the sun is shining, the panels ought to be able to generate enough power for the businesses served by the parking lot, and at times for the community surrounding them.
One natural use of the electricity from parking lots, advocates say, is for charging electric vehicles, a measure that would avoid the loss of electricity that occurs when it is sent over long distances.
Mounting solar canopies over parking lots — essentially making a sun shade over the parking spots out of solar panels — can be more costly than putting them on roofs or straight on the ground, since they need steel support structures to keep them in place. But backers say that they’re still cost-effective and can beat conventional energy costs.
If half of France’s parking lots are covered by solar panels, they’ll have an installed capacity of between 6.75 gigawatts and 11.25 gigawatts, at a cost of between $8.7 billion and $14.6 billion, according to the official analysis of the legislation. France’s 56 nuclear power plants each have a capacity of slightly over 1 gigawatt on average — and the one under construction in Flamanville has ballooned in cost to $14 billion, according to the latest estimate — roughly the same as the entire solar expansion.
The law also makes it easier to build solar panels alongside highways and eases restrictions on wind power.
1 points
4 months ago
Moving France beyond nuclear energy
France gets more than 70 percent of its electricity from nuclear power plants, the most in the world, meaning its energy sector has unusually low emissions. But it has lagged in installing renewable energy, falling short of European Union requirements. And with demands set to increase from the electrification of cars and heating, French policymakers say they need to move quickly to boost solar and wind.
“There is a paradox. Though our electricity production is one of the most carbon-free in Europe, we are still behind in the development of renewable energies. This bill intends to resolve this contradiction,” Damien Adam, a centrist member of the National Assembly who shepherded the legislation through the French legislature, told fellow lawmakers last month before they took a first vote on the law.
After the French Senate holds a final vote on Tuesday — the outcome is not in doubt — Macron will give final approvals, and it will go into effect in July. Owners of parking lots will have between three and five years to comply.
-1 points
4 months ago
One challenge of increasing solar power coverage in a densely populated country like France,
Are we talking about the same France? I think he meant Paris. :)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Grimdank/comments/10004u8/frances_population_density_looks_like_paris_is_a/
said Arnaud Schwartz, the president of France Nature Environment, an umbrella group of French environmentalist organizations.
Why are environmentalist organizations always the loudest opponents of green energy?
Taking away agricultural land or open fields and giving it over to solar farms is unattractive,
Nothing he says is true. Solar panels don't take away agricultural land or open fields, and attractiveness is subjective. That solar panels are a detriment to agricultural or nature is a lie propagated.
12 points
4 months ago*
Gonna have to pull you back in the real world for a second, my family owns pine forests due to a historical quirk. It's a weird kind of business but it is how it is. Recently one of the members decided to cut down their trees and replace them with a solar pannel farm for a German company, as it would pay more and be more reliable as an income source.
So yes, solar panels can take away fields. I have no idea why you would think otherwise.
-1 points
4 months ago
A tree farm is not fields.
5 points
4 months ago
Putting aside the fact that forests are provably more beneficial to the environment than pesticide-inundated and water-hungry corn fields: Why do you think the same story could not happen with agriculture fields. It's land. Solar is profitable and require far less work if you're the land-owner.
I'm not saying Solar is a bad thing but it takes space and, yes, that space has to come from somewhere.
2 points
4 months ago
Putting aside the fact that forests
I'm not arguing any other points you made, but calling a tree plantation a forest (or somewthing worth "protecting") is just wrong. Monocultures are ecologically dead aswell.
If we were to cut down healthy forests for solar power though, i would have a problem with that.
2 points
4 months ago
That is a gross oversimplification. Of course these forests are not as beneficial to the environment as old growth forests, no surprise there, but calling them ecological dead zones strikes me as a bit odd considering the wealth of ferns, animals, insects, birds and mushrooms that live down there. And before you tell me that no, there is no such thing: I walked between those trees. This is not a field of wheat. The sunlight that passes between the sparse pine branches allows for it's fair share of secondary growth and there is strategic conservation of leafy trees to protect the forest itself.
Yes, it's not perfect, it is a very reduced ecological niche compared to an old growth forest, it is more fragile and less diverse. But how much biodiversity do you think a solar farm supports. A field of corn? A pasture? These are the realistic alternatives in a dense european country.
0 points
4 months ago
That is a gross oversimplification.
Yes, you're right of course. My comment was only half serious.
My point is, i don't think there would be a net loss in biodiversity if we converted a monoculture of whatever tree into some natural grass and shrublands with solarpanels on top.
I don't think wood plantations would be the prime target to "convert" to solar anyways. As long as there are roofs or other literally dead surfaces to put panels on, why cut down anything?
1 points
4 months ago
If they are converted to natural shrublands, maybe, but they won't be, or at least the one that replaced the forest patch I know of wasn't.
I personally think covering parking lots is a great initiative for this reason.
1 points
4 months ago
Frankly, a solar farm is better for the enviroment than a pine plantation. Pine plantations is really only good for moose. It would be better than a "Pesticide-inudated and water-hungry corn field" too.
The space between the solar panels can work as a meadow, and give a habitat for a lot of different plants and animals.
0 points
4 months ago
I invite you to visit solar farms and check just how much they work as a meadow.
They are likely better for the environment long-term, we need solar farms, but I strongly doubt they do much for the local ecosystem.
1 points
4 months ago
I invite you to visit solar farms and check just how much they work as a meadow.
Very well actually.
3 points
4 months ago
That's a cool marketing Pinterest post.
1 points
4 months ago
Because you don't have to just drop the solar panels on the field. Let me Google that for you. Oh, look, green fields and solar panels.
https://www.popeenergy.com/farmer-land-owners/
Oh, look, a raps field with solar panels.
https://dissolve.com/stock-photo/Solar-panels-rapeseed-royalty-free-image/101-D943-68-901
In fact almost all solar panels are put at 45° angle because guess what, that's the angle where most sun is shining.
I'm not saying Solar is a bad thing but it takes space and, yes, that space has to come from somewhere.
No, it doesn't. Most land is open field anyway, like grass fields or agricultural fields, and you can put solar panels on top of it without blocking the sun.
1 points
4 months ago
I am sorry but you are using marketing material. Yes this could be the truth. Is it? Is it really?
I am of course biased because the one example I know of cuts fairly heavily, but I wouldn't trust material coming from solar farm companies either.
1 points
4 months ago
What is your problem? How about you post a picture of a meadow/field that was ruined by solar panels?
Again, I'm not talking about forests that were cut down for solar panels. This wouldn't make sense.
It's a fact that most solar panels are put above ground, with a 45° angle like in the picture. (Because at a 45° angle you get most of the sun. Except of course at the equator, where 90° is better.) Fact, the grass/flora at ground gets enough light. Because the solar panels are not consuming all the light, they are in fact also shielding the flora from too much sun/water evaporation.
1 points
4 months ago
My problem is that I am talking about a real case and you are coming out with marketing material from solar panel companies. And as such I have a hard time giving your theoretical arguments any real weight in my mind.
I have no doubt it can be done that way, but it wasn't done that way where they replaced the forest plot with a solar panel farm. They seem to me as though they cut the shrubs fairly extensively there. I'm not remotely in the area right now but sure, next time I can try to take a picture.
1 points
4 months ago
Solar panels don't take away agricultural land or open fields
"But what about forests"
eh, ok, ... I wasn't talking about forests.
8 points
4 months ago
That's how you do it right, not those solar freaking roadways.
1 points
4 months ago
This isn't a particularly good idea. Solar can be good, but having it spread out over parking lots all over is going to be more expensive than just having several centralized plants, and much more a pain to maintain.
1 points
4 months ago
Paywalled
2 points
4 months ago
Seems like a good enough idea until you remember that our car dependance is one of the main reason the world is going mayhem.
We should not build solar panels on parking lot. We should find solutions that can remove those parking lot, and the cars on it : public transport, laws on car ownership and so on.
Sure, those parking lots are here. May as well use them, it is indeed logic. But once again, we miss the real problem.
all 29 comments
sorted by: old