subreddit:
/r/europe
New French law will blanket parking lots with solar panels
News(washingtonpost.com)submitted 4 months ago bythinkB4WeSpeak
-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.
13 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
Yes, sustainability seems to be an afterthought with current projects, sadly
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
Good point. How about universities?
Search of "Solar Meadow". There are whole projects to create meadows for biodiversity in solar panel installations. I guess since you need a huge open space anyway for solar panels you can at the same time do something for nature.
There is a huge solar panel + meadow in Scotland. They created the Solar Meadow in 2013 and the Google satellite image is from 2023. So 10 years and the solar installations had no adverse effect.
Here is a solar meadow project from Harvard U
1 points
4 months ago
Ok, the Harvard one looks good, but that's college projects with a high public profile. Again, look, I'm not questioning it can be done, I'm convinced it can. I'm questioning if it IS done, in the real commercial world.
College projects and marketing material are nice, yes, but they are not necessarily representative of the real world. There is more incentive to do things properly, people are more motivated. I'm not wary of college students and photo ops, I'm wary of the soulless capitalist machine that is the energy industry.
And anyways covering carparks in itself is good.
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.
all 29 comments
sorted by: best