4 ms·

I'm confused. Reading many of the comments it sounds like preventing evaporation is the major reason for this. Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation m

I'm confused. Reading many of the comments it sounds like preventing evaporation is the major reason for this. Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation must not be a major issue, so we shouldn't bother. I was under the impression that building more solar into the grid was the reason for putting up solar panels and preventing evaporation was a side benefit of their placement. Did I read this wrong?

Denvercoder9 4y ago
> Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation must not be a major issue, so we shouldn't bother. Because of the droughts and increased population, preventing evaporation has become a lot more important today than it was 50 or even 20 years ago.
- ehutch79 4y ago
  I get the reason for preventing evaporation. > Reading many of the comments it sounds like preventing evaporation is the major reason for this. That's the important part of the paragraph. I'm not asking about the evaporation, so much as why that's what everyone seems to thing the point of building the solar panels is? I would expect they were going to build them anyways, and the prevention of evaporation seems to be a bonus. But reading the other comments, it would appear that's a wrong assumption.
epistasis 4y ago
> Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation must not be a major issue, so we shouldn't bother. Do you really believe this? It reminds me of the joke about an economist that doesn't pick up $100 off the ground, because if it was a real bill, somebody else would have already picked it up.
- comte7092 4y ago
  Haven’t you heard, markets are always efficient! In all seriousness, people really seem to gloss over the “in the long run” part of that hypothesis.
  - epistasis 4y ago
    The entire premise of entrepreneurship is picking up on opportunities that others have overlooked, or opportunities that are emerging due to changes. So I'm always surprised when I encounter someone on HN that's not on the lookout for these opportunities.
    - comte7092 4y ago
      Exactly, people forget that economics describes human systems. It’s only true if someone is out there doing it!
- ehutch79 4y ago
  No of course not. But reading the other comments here, that's what I'm getting. This feels like a worse version of the whole 'the plan to fix the problem isn't perfect, so lets do nothing' I see a lot. It does confuse me though. It's clearly not the primary goal of adding the panels, but a side benefit.
liketochill 4y ago
If the expense of the solar panels is not Bourne by the beneficiary of the increased water supply then there was no incentive other than the solar power.
- ehutch79 4y ago
  Isn't solar power to point of solar panels? Other benefits are just bonus's of their placement.
thesausageking 4y ago
It is done in some places, often with "shade balls"[0]. If doing it with solar panels brings to cost down to ~$0, then why not do it many more places? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shade_balls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shade_balls
qdog 4y ago
Not in CA, but where I live there is continuous work on covering canals. A lot of canals were dug a century or more ago and are just ditches, something like 60% of water is lost to evaporation and seepage. The issue is still the cost, the price of water delivery is not generating the revenue to do it all at once. If they can also do solar, they can recoup those costs faster.
- pg938hkd 4y ago
  [dead]
buffington 4y ago
The idea isn't limited to reducing evaporation, but for controlling algae. From the article: > reduce algae growth and the need for maintenance by limiting sunlight falling on the water Evaporation is an issue, for sure, but so is the cost of keeping algae under control. It makes a lot of sense to trade algae for solar panels even if you have to maintain the solar panels.

Denvercoder9 4y ago

> Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation must not be a major issue, so we shouldn't bother. Because of the droughts and increased population, preventing evaporation has become a lot more important today than it was 50 or even 20 years ago.

ehutch79 4y ago
I get the reason for preventing evaporation. > Reading many of the comments it sounds like preventing evaporation is the major reason for this. That's the important part of the paragraph. I'm not asking about the evaporation, so much as why that's what everyone seems to thing the point of building the solar panels is? I would expect they were going to build them anyways, and the prevention of evaporation seems to be a bonus. But reading the other comments, it would appear that's a wrong assumption.

epistasis 4y ago

> Given that it hasn't been done yet, evaporation must not be a major issue, so we shouldn't bother. Do you really believe this? It reminds me of the joke about an economist that doesn't pick up $100 off the ground, because if it was a real bill, somebody else would have already picked it up.

comte7092 4y ago
Haven’t you heard, markets are always efficient! In all seriousness, people really seem to gloss over the “in the long run” part of that hypothesis.
- epistasis 4y ago
  The entire premise of entrepreneurship is picking up on opportunities that others have overlooked, or opportunities that are emerging due to changes. So I'm always surprised when I encounter someone on HN that's not on the lookout for these opportunities.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    Exactly, people forget that economics describes human systems. It’s only true if someone is out there doing it!
ehutch79 4y ago
No of course not. But reading the other comments here, that's what I'm getting. This feels like a worse version of the whole 'the plan to fix the problem isn't perfect, so lets do nothing' I see a lot. It does confuse me though. It's clearly not the primary goal of adding the panels, but a side benefit.

liketochill 4y ago

If the expense of the solar panels is not Bourne by the beneficiary of the increased water supply then there was no incentive other than the solar power.

ehutch79 4y ago
Isn't solar power to point of solar panels? Other benefits are just bonus's of their placement.

thesausageking 4y ago

It is done in some places, often with "shade balls"[0]. If doing it with solar panels brings to cost down to ~$0, then why not do it many more places? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shade_balls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shade_balls

qdog 4y ago

Not in CA, but where I live there is continuous work on covering canals. A lot of canals were dug a century or more ago and are just ditches, something like 60% of water is lost to evaporation and seepage. The issue is still the cost, the price of water delivery is not generating the revenue to do it all at once. If they can also do solar, they can recoup those costs faster.

pg938hkd 4y ago
[dead]

buffington 4y ago

The idea isn't limited to reducing evaporation, but for controlling algae. From the article: > reduce algae growth and the need for maintenance by limiting sunlight falling on the water Evaporation is an issue, for sure, but so is the cost of keeping algae under control. It makes a lot of sense to trade algae for solar panels even if you have to maintain the solar panels.