A : agriphotovoltaism, can drive up most field yields because loads of places are now too dry and too hot in the summer. Solar panels block the excess sun and keep the moisture in the ground. Conversely, you can’t park more cars under solar panels.
B : your average field is much larger than a car park. So installing a solar power plant is more efficient in a field (less paperwork per square meter, spend more time building than moving material around…).
C : car parks are often surrounded by buildings which will block the sun. This doesn’t happen on most fields (which rarely have tall trees)
D : a car raming into your poles is bound to happen and you pretty much have to replace the whole pole. A cow ramming into your pole might happen, the pole won’t give a fuck.
E : installing solar panels above car park is a lot more expensive (taller infrastructure, need more space between poles so need chonkier poles, maintenance high up is way more costly, etc ) And solar panel companies usually work on a much tighter budget than say the petrol industry for exemple. So every dollar counts
Anyway, next time please do some research instead of posting a divisive post and spreading misconception ;)
Edit : as some others pointed out :
destroying natural environments in order to put up solar panels is not okay. Which i totally agree with. That’s why I was talking of agriphotovoltaism specifically.
if we get the opportunity, we might as well put up solar panels in both fields and cities. We shouldn’t paint it as an either/or situation because it risks dividing the pro solar population and i don’t need to explain why this is a bad idea
Around here they’re cutting down thousands of acres of trees for them. Tractors are as tall as cars, you have to mow livestock fields. Field installs make a lot of sense for a variety of cases, but there isn’t a right answer, neither the poster or your comment.
To me the real issue is the greed, a Florida investment firm buying 1k acres of contiguous woodland, wiping it, installing solar for a casino to but so they can market how green they are. While individual homeowners have to jump through hoops and deal with snake oil salesmen to install, with heavy limits. That transfers the wealth from individuals and small towns to corporate overlords and the ultra wealthy.
Requiring parking lots to have them pushes back on corporations, plus turrets rings of heavy duty light poles in parking lots, people do drive their cars into them, but it’s not often and they’re not frequently replaced because of it, just designed to withstand.
For the tractor part, some people have started using vertical solar panels which still shield vegetation form wind, excessive sun… But leave much more room for vehicles.
East/West facing vertical panels are pretty impressive. The peak output at noon is lower than south facing angled placement, but there is a boost from East and from West before and after solar azimuth that pushes overall output higher.
Given that :
A : agriphotovoltaism, can drive up most field yields because loads of places are now too dry and too hot in the summer. Solar panels block the excess sun and keep the moisture in the ground. Conversely, you can’t park more cars under solar panels.
B : your average field is much larger than a car park. So installing a solar power plant is more efficient in a field (less paperwork per square meter, spend more time building than moving material around…).
C : car parks are often surrounded by buildings which will block the sun. This doesn’t happen on most fields (which rarely have tall trees)
D : a car raming into your poles is bound to happen and you pretty much have to replace the whole pole. A cow ramming into your pole might happen, the pole won’t give a fuck.
E : installing solar panels above car park is a lot more expensive (taller infrastructure, need more space between poles so need chonkier poles, maintenance high up is way more costly, etc ) And solar panel companies usually work on a much tighter budget than say the petrol industry for exemple. So every dollar counts
Anyway, next time please do some research instead of posting a divisive post and spreading misconception ;)
Edit : as some others pointed out :
Around here they’re cutting down thousands of acres of trees for them. Tractors are as tall as cars, you have to mow livestock fields. Field installs make a lot of sense for a variety of cases, but there isn’t a right answer, neither the poster or your comment.
To me the real issue is the greed, a Florida investment firm buying 1k acres of contiguous woodland, wiping it, installing solar for a casino to but so they can market how green they are. While individual homeowners have to jump through hoops and deal with snake oil salesmen to install, with heavy limits. That transfers the wealth from individuals and small towns to corporate overlords and the ultra wealthy.
Requiring parking lots to have them pushes back on corporations, plus turrets rings of heavy duty light poles in parking lots, people do drive their cars into them, but it’s not often and they’re not frequently replaced because of it, just designed to withstand.
For the tractor part, some people have started using vertical solar panels which still shield vegetation form wind, excessive sun… But leave much more room for vehicles.
East/West facing vertical panels are pretty impressive. The peak output at noon is lower than south facing angled placement, but there is a boost from East and from West before and after solar azimuth that pushes overall output higher.