196

16566 readers

1875 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1028

Just kind of makes sense no? (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

148 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yes.

Land use doesn't determine baseline soil quality, but soil quality often determines land use.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Seems like solar panels can be easily relocated when the land is desired to be used for agriculture. I admittedly don’t know what the loss would be on some of the power infrastructure for routing this would be though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I believe they are relatively hard to move, but I'm not a solar expert by any stretch (though it's a different story when it comes to soil).

Somewhat related: putting panels on reclaimed tailings ponds or waste rock dumps is a good idea, in that usually these have an engineered cover (rock/soil/LDPE) That limits rooting depth (don't want plants reaching what we are trying to protect [toxic waste]) so we plant grasses and shit rather than trees. Grasses + panels is the best of both cover stability and green energy