all 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 2 years ago

Which will eventually be sold to private entities and public land will continue to disappear. Just like all of the public land Weyerhauser has gobbled up and shut off access. Oh I'm sorry you could pay $350 for a yearly pass that they only put a handful of out.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    We don't really need new area for solar. We've got plenty, and I mean plenty, of developed hard surfaces panels can be put on top of.

    Also, they already usually have infrastructural connection to power, so thats a bonus.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    How many acres of parking lots does the federal government own that could accomplish this without disturbing the environment?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is way bigger than you think it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It’s just frustrating when people talk about solar they seem to be ok with wrecking the environment. It would be relatively easy to retrofit parking lots.

    People also talk about turning roads and sidewalks into solar. It’s like parking is some sort of untouchable structure that we can’t demand be part of the solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Good point. I was gonna say, acres upon acres of solar farms would be equivalent to paving the land they're on. And unlike the African Sahara, we don't have much in the way of actual wasteland with zero life around here.

    Someone further down the comment chain suggested parking lots. Rooftops would be a better move too - just need a tax incentive and we're off to the races.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago
    [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    For reference, that is an area larger than South Carolina and nearly as large as Maine.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    Solar is great, but decentralization is the way. Not this centralized, metered, power centralizing "green energy".

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Approx 250 acres to a square km, so let's call this 100,000 sq km of land. That's about a fifth of what would be needed to power the world.

    So, is the US now planning on powering Canada and South America too, or is something funny going on?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments