Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Growing crops under solar panels

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 154 posts

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#111

Post by jcampbell1 »

tengbretson wrote: post #36

There are solar farms being installed on previously very productive farm land near me. Between the thousands of truckloads of gravel and the steel piles being driven into the ground as far as the eye can see, I doubt the land will productively grow food of any kind for a century or more. edit: I apologize if this is difficult to hear.

We dedicate 39 million acres to corn ethanol so our gas is 10% ethanol. 15 million acres of panels would supply all of the US energy needs including all current petroleum energy.

1 acre of corn produces 11 million kcal. 1 acre of solar panels produces 300 million kcal.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#112

Post by wil421 »

otherme123 wrote: post #96
hutzlibu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This[0] is a berry farm I was just at. As you can see it’s already covered to protect from extra sun." Erm, I can see a greenhouse. I think they are made to increase temperature for the plants and not to protect from extra sun. Strawberries like sun and would not benefit from shade, unless we are talking about very intense sunlight and not much water. Most plants usually want as much sun as they can get, so long as…

A lot of plants doesn't like and cannot survive the sun at central hours unless you water them like crazy. Basically you are watering to avoid dehydration, but not producing, like drinking in the desert. A lot of plants evolved to thrive near/under trees. Greenhouses can tame the sunlight, and usually they are painted in white in regions of too much sun ( https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl6tMOU84tk ). Also, greenhouses…

I live in the hot and humid Deep South and my strawberries do not mind the sun. There’s a local berry patch that has lots of different berries, including strawberries, and no shades in sight.

What’s in OPs image is a greenhouse. The sides can be closed if low temperatures are coming in at night.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#113

Post by fulafel »

hdhrufjdi wrote: post #104
xyzzyz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And if France makes it mandatory to cover all "substantial" parking lots it will generate as much electricity from just that as 10 nuclear power plants [1]. It will not, not even close to that. You are being deceived. This deception is willful, because it is obvious to anyone who has any idea about realities of energy generation. The linked article, however, while not literally lying, omits some obvious facts, the…

Good thing that wind power is stronger in the winter, thus complementary to solar energy. > They are not, not even close, and this is even ignoring how nuclear power in France subsidizes solar/wind in a deliberate, systemic way. Source? Do you also want to tell us about the subsidiaries of nuclear energy in France?

And of course the main way nuclear got help more from subsidies is the huge early amounts of taxpayer funds poured into its R&D and military use since the 40s - if wind and solar had gotten even half of that, renewables would be decades further along and further down the cost curve by now.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#114

Post by pfdietz »

photochemsyn wrote: post #49
throwuwu wrote: post #3

I’m no farmer but wouldn’t putting a whole bunch of stuff in a field make it difficult to drive a tractor through it? Like have you seen the size of modern tractors? These panels will need to be 20ft in the air with support posts really far apart to accommodate seed drills and sprayers and other equipment that the tractor pulls behind it.

Vertical bifacial panels are one approach that doesn't interfere with tractors and equipment, and still have comparable generation (with twice as many panels, so more expensive): https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/01/24/vertical-pv-for-clean... > "For conventional ground-mounted systems, the scientists considered a tilt angle of 20 degrees and an average estimated energy yield 1,020 Wh/W. For the bifacial vertical west…

Vertical orientation can also make sense if you're trying to bias the PV to produce more in winter, when the output might be more valuable.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#115

Post by conductr »

imtringued wrote: post #108
jcampbell1 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you were thinking about doing a million dollar solar install, but you couldn’t come up with $10k for land to do the install?

He didn't say he wanted to do a "million dollar solar install" and he certainly didn't say he couldn't come up with "$10k for land".

This. I also only mentioned that part because “selling” was really “convincing” as I wasn’t asking for any money from them. Only a partnership. My early assumption was they’d be receptive to it because shade would be a big boost to comfort and I’d get free use of land though a mutually beneficial arrangement.

This was a long time ago so I don’t actually even remember what my ultimate business strategy was, only that I talked to over 100 different companies/property owners and got overwhelming unreceptive feedback (that they didn’t care about shading their parking lots) so that was the extent of my interest in chasing the opportunity. I don’t think $10k would secure much land at all. Even back then, maybe 1 acre 200 miles away from a city. That wasn’t economically feasible back then. I think it’s only recently becoming so and some “solar farms” are popping up. I’ve moved on and don’t follow it much anymore.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#116

Post by ctz »

xyzzyz wrote: post #94
locallost wrote: post #69

There are interesting things in the article, but I think it was never about available land use, but just another knee jerk argument against solar panels. Example: Disneyland Europe will generate over 30 GWh per year from just covering a part of its parking lot. And if France makes it mandatory to cover all "substantial" parking lots it will generate as much electricity from just that as 10 nuclear power plants [1]. A…

> And if France makes it mandatory to cover all "substantial" parking lots it will generate as much electricity from just that as 10 nuclear power plants [1]. It will not, not even close to that. You are being deceived. This deception is willful, because it is obvious to anyone who has any idea about realities of energy generation. The linked article, however, while not literally lying, omits some obvious facts, the…

That's an awful lot of vitriolic words to express: comparing kW and kWp is a type error.

> This is caused by the unfortunate fact which is that the sun doesn't shine at all for at least half of the year

And factually incorrect. Currently sitting in Northern Europe making 5.05kW from a 5.6kWp installation.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#117

Post by weinzierl »

Elon Musk once said:

"So, there's quite a big keep-out zone, and when you factor the keep-out zone into account, the solar panels put on that area would typically generate more power than that nuclear power plant."

I always wondered if that is really true?

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#118

Post by the8472 »

thethethethe wrote: post #21
crooked-v wrote: post #17

I really don't get why people keep coming up with all these elaborate plans to mix solar panels with other stuff that's in active use, instead of just putting fields of them out in non-endangered desert elevated enough off the ground that they won't actively interfere with local animals.

Why would we destroy pristine desert, which is rapidly disappearing, when we could cover land that has already been disturbed, like parking lots, building roofs, and farmland? Deserts are important ecosystems regardless of their immediate utility to industrial society

> Deserts are important ecosystem

Are you using "important" to say "have a function beyond being inert matter"? Then sure, but that information is already conveyed by saying "it's an ecosystem", adding that kind of "important" doesn't add information. If you mean "rank above many other things in a similar category" then I'm skeptical.

The first one isn't helpful in this context because we need to put PV somewhere, we might as well look for a place of less relative importance.

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#119

Post by the8472 »

downrightmike wrote: post #74
onethought wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t make that much sense. We can transmit power pretty long distances these days. I don’t understand “don’t disturb the desert” - why? It’s not just useless to us… it’s useless to most living things.

I don't know where OP got that from, but we don't actually need to use it, an a lot of things live there. It isn't all just bare sun bleached rock and sand. https://www.desertmuseum.org/desert/sonora.php

"things live there" can also be true about gamma-ray sterilized canned food[0]. That doesn't mean it's important to the continued functioning of the ecosphere. Also, some deserts are more lifeless than others.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodurans

Re: Growing crops under solar panels

#120

Post by locallost »

xyzzyz wrote: post #94
locallost wrote: post #69

There are interesting things in the article, but I think it was never about available land use, but just another knee jerk argument against solar panels. Example: Disneyland Europe will generate over 30 GWh per year from just covering a part of its parking lot. And if France makes it mandatory to cover all "substantial" parking lots it will generate as much electricity from just that as 10 nuclear power plants [1]. A…

> And if France makes it mandatory to cover all "substantial" parking lots it will generate as much electricity from just that as 10 nuclear power plants [1]. It will not, not even close to that. You are being deceived. This deception is willful, because it is obvious to anyone who has any idea about realities of energy generation. The linked article, however, while not literally lying, omits some obvious facts, the…

You're making a case against solar panels but that is not what my comment was about. If they're worthless they're worthless, but there's more than enough space for them.
Post reply on HN