I thought this was going to be about solar panels installed synergistically on food farms, running more efficiently because of the lower temperature, and increa

I thought this was going to be about solar panels installed synergistically on food farms, running more efficiently because of the lower temperature, and increasing farm yield by reducing heat and water stress on the plants. (Most plants can turn only a fixed maximum of photons into sugar, daily, easily exceeded in an hour or three of full sun, with exposure after just endured.) There is a clever form of this where the panels are mounted vertically in fencerows running north-south. The "bifacial" panels collect both morning and afternoon sun, with room between for a tractor. Another form is to mount the panels horizontally directly above the plants, so they get sun only in morning and afternoon, and are protected from harshest noon light, and also freak hailstorms. The panels are cantilevered out from both sides of fenceposts running down a row, with the tractor driving in space between rows and running its attachments under. In pasture you can do whatever is cheap, so long as the herd can get to grass under them. The herd might also do better with less exposure, and they keep the weeds down. Usually there is a little less room for the plants, per acre, but possibly higher yield anyway, and the field produces saleable power year round. The panels are not as close together as in a dedicated solar farm, but dual-use land is free, so there is no need to scrimp. It is easy to find loud complaints in England about farms that have converted 100% to solar because it makes the farmer more money than actually farming. This seems like a good compromise.