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

South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

reutersconnect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 229 posts

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#191

Post by pjc50 »

Y-bar wrote: post #174
httpz wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a desert so trees can't survive without irrigation. Since water is scarce as well, there aren't enough trees to cover the vast low density area.

You can always start small and over decades grow the area. After all that is how cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam became bike friendly, not just a few years, but decades of work. What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracaena_cinnabari or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilopsis ?

As a fellow European: we're prone to underestimating how uninhabitable bits of America are that nonetheless have people living in them. Those are port cities and therefore stable and temperate. You cannot green Arizona.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#192

Post by pjc50 »

SpaceL10n wrote: post #71
rocketpastsix wrote: post #66

I really want America to get on board with this. Getting people to not drive is a nearly impossible task given how slow cities move to change the codes, so if we have to have parking lots, put them to use.

If you want America on board, get the people on board. Tell them why it's a good idea to stop driving their car. I'm not saying this to be snarky, but that's what it's going to take.

Really the two big reasons for not driving ice cars are temperature and sea level rise. Even then I think most of America and even Florida would regard losing Florida over the next century to be a reasonable price to pay for not having to get on a bus.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#193

Post by [deleted] »

Ray20 wrote: post #183
greyb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building solar panel installations in remote locations still requires linking that back to the main grid, and all the in-between infrastructure needed to transform and transmit that power. Building it in an urban location allows you to tap into the existing grid without much added public investment, similar to how some power grids will purchase power from homeowners as an added incentive for doing a home solar instal…

> Building solar panel installations in remote locations still requires linking that back to the main grid, and all the in-between infrastructure needed to transform and transmit that power Some people actually have an idea of how electricity works and statements like these make them think that the whole renewable energy industry is one big scam. In your opinion, what percentage of the total cost is involved in tappi…

[deleted]

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#194

Post by drfloyd51 »

Mawr wrote: post #144
eclipticplane wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better version for shade and city beautification is to force trees around/within the parking lot.

An even better version is to do away with the parking lot part and just have the trees.

Then how do show owners eat and pay their employees when no customers arrive because parking downtown is such a chore.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#195

Post by pjc50 »

Ray20 wrote: post #183
greyb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building solar panel installations in remote locations still requires linking that back to the main grid, and all the in-between infrastructure needed to transform and transmit that power. Building it in an urban location allows you to tap into the existing grid without much added public investment, similar to how some power grids will purchase power from homeowners as an added incentive for doing a home solar instal…

> Building solar panel installations in remote locations still requires linking that back to the main grid, and all the in-between infrastructure needed to transform and transmit that power Some people actually have an idea of how electricity works and statements like these make them think that the whole renewable energy industry is one big scam. In your opinion, what percentage of the total cost is involved in tappi…

The really critical cost isn't monetary but time. There's plenty of places where the interconnect queue is holding up projects a lot: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2025/05/06/study-...

Same in parts of the UK. Scottish renewables are bottlenecked on transmission to London.

Whereas connecting generation to a substation near demand usually shows up as "negative demand" and doesn't require big upgrades.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#196

Post by ceejayoz »

rmason wrote: post #104
ceejayoz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is definitely not going to be easier or cheaper.

They covered most of the parking lots with solar cells a few years back at nearby Michigan State. The economics weren't there, but as a friend who worked there pointed out they viewed it as research. It's great that when it snows you don't get nearly as much of the white stuff on your vehicle. But when it snows energy production slows to a crawl. We have a lot of snowy days a third of the year.

I live in a fairly snowy area. The panels here are steeply angled. Tends to slide off.

Same reason metal roofs are becoming popular in the area recently.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#197

Post by zadikian »

userbinator wrote: post #11

Authoritarian Asian countries being authoritarian as usual. Wouldn't mind putting up panels if I could sell and use the power. But fuck governments telling property "owners" what they can or can't do.

It says "public" parking lots, which maybe means government-owned ones, not private ones open to the public.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#198

Post by Ray20 »

Y-bar wrote: post #188
Ray20 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the most important part, in which you pay for all this (directly or indirectly).

As opposed me paying indirectly and directly for all the subsidies for the petroleum industry? > Global explicit subsidies for fossil fuels amounted to around $1.5 trillion in 2022. […] The $7 trillion figure includes the social and environmental costs of fossil fuels. https://ourworldindata.org/how-much-subsidies-fossil-fuels

The article you linked literally talks about fuel subsidies in the UK aimed at reducing the final cost of electricity for households and its vulnerability to rising of fissile fuel prices.

In the UK. A country that was one of the first to transition to renewable energy sources and which currently has one of the most expensive electricity prices. And then, to these "subsidies", losses from "road incidents" are added as other subsidies for fossil fuels.

Sorry, this is very difficult to perceive as an argument, it is literally designed for degenerates without education, who have difficulty understanding the meaning of words put together in sentences, and who, for this reason, evaluate any text by the presence of already familiar slogans in it

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#199

Post by Ray20 »

rainsford wrote: post #187
Ray20 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the most important part, in which you pay for all this (directly or indirectly).

Why do you think anybody was operating under the assumption that this was free? But keeping your car topped up now is hardly free either, especially lately, so the question is really about cost comparison. And that's before you get into any externality costs.

> so the question is really about cost comparison

Yes, and I was talking specifically about the cost of this difference.

Re: South Korea Mandates Solar Panels for Public Parking Lots

#200

Post by JoeAltmaier »

rocketpastsix wrote: post #75
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So often though, they are obstructed by nearby buildings.

maybe in some areas, but in the suburbs? they will get plenty of light covering the parking lot of a wal mart or target.

Agreed. But in the suburbs, there's no lack of good locations to place dedicated solar farms without obstructing traffic.
Post reply on HN