• essell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    231
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    It can be really good to cover the fields!

    Reduce evaporation, expand the range of plants that can grow and provide subsidies for hard pressed farmers

    Protecting food and water resources are going to get increasingly important over the next few decades

      • notabot@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        ·
        5 months ago

        The cynic in me suspects it’s an attempt to sow division within pro-solar panel groups. Get them arguing amongst themselves over where to put them, rather than uniting to push for more panels.

        • kieron115@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah I really hate this post, and how often it seems to surface on lemmy. Agrivoltaics is good for energy and for the plants*!

          *Some exclusions apply. Not all plants grow better with the added shade.

      • Ibisalt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        In Switzerland, there was a vote on a petition requiring new houses to include solar panels. Conservatives opposed it, arguing that construction costs were already too high without such regulations. Instead, those same people want to build massive solar farms on untouched natural landscapes. To me, the reason is obvious: energy companies want to maintain control over a centralized power infrastructure. This way, they can keep charging us high electricity prices while pocketing subsidies for infrastructure projects.

        • Aniki@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          no, it’s one thing to allow solar panels on houses, but a completely other thing to require them. i’m against the requirement as well. there’s absolutely no sane reason for that besides making people uncomfortable if they don’t want them. if they want them, they can already get them.

          • cynar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            A lot of the big building companies, in Europe, treat solar panels as a premium option and so charge a larger profit margin on them. Installing solar, while constructing the house is a LOT cheaper and easier than retrofitting them later.

            The panels have gotten cheap enough that it’s no longer a real cost burden, Vs the cost of the house.

      • NinePeedles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Put them everywhere. I don’t care where they go. I want my son and daughter to have a planet to enjoy and raise a family in.

      • FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s the way the typical American thinks

        'Muricans have a habit of seeing things as zero-sum, because that’s what their shitty system relies on

    • Inucune@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      Farmers are the biggest welfare queens in this country. They all bitch and moan about needing subsidies and everything but they all have crop insurance.

      • 0xDREADBEEF@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        how many farmers do you know? You understand many are black and you’re calling them welfare queens, right? I get that people think farmers are republicans or conservative but that’s just admitting you have outdated knowledge. The times have changed