5 ms·
Large solar farms could trigger rain in the desert
- konschubert 3y agoCue the conservationists to explain us why this is in fact bad.
- RoyalHenOil 3y agoIt's mentioned in the article: >In a 2020 study, researchers found that implausibly large solar farms, taking up more than 1 million square kilometers in the Sahara desert, could boost local rainfall and cause vegetation to flourish. But the bounty would come with a cost, the researchers found: By altering wind patterns, the solar farms would push tropical rain bands north. “If you push those northward, that’s not good news for the Amazon,” says Zhengyao Lu, a climate scientist at Lund University and lead author of the 2020 study.
- bettercaust 3y agoI wondered if that would be the case. If rain is falling in the desert where it previously didn't, that means rain is not falling elsewhere it previously did.
- pbhjpbhj 3y agoPresumably if you can divert rainfall at sea to be rainfall on land then that's better? As the planet warms, don't we get more rain? (Because there's more evaporation?)
- ted_bunny 3y agoI'll bet there's some reason that'd be bad too.
- pbhjpbhj 3y agoI was thinking the water eventually, mostly, makes it to the sea in any case. But, it probably reduces oxygenation of surface water (?) and maybe increases levels of chemical transfer from land to sea? I wouldn't expect either of those to be significant though. Any thoughts on other possible effects, or is it just a general 'it's probably shit in a way we don't realise' feeling?
- _heimdall 3y agoWhy would you assume this must be a good thing and couldn't possibly have any negative effects?
- Simulacra 3y agoReally it is the environmentalists who will use the environmental impact study process as an opportunity to sue, and stop everything. This is what's halted many green energy projects.
- dsign 3y agoEasy: it would make the desert a little bit less inhospitable, and it would make the average person a little bit less in shame of the environmental havoc they cause. Both things would beget more humans on the planet, which would be bad for the (the part of the) environment (not directly connected to humans).
- yetihehe 3y agoDoes anyone has an idea of what would be the effect of a large solar farm that converts 95% of light into usable energy? It would mean that this light doesn't fall on ground and doesn't heat surrounding air, so net cooling in one place and exporting that heat into the rest of earth (where it is used and expelled as heat)?
- Asraelite 3y agoAs I understand it, solar panels have a maximum theoretical efficiency that's much lower than that. 33% for a conventional design with others apparently going a bit higher, but I don't think you can ever get anywhere close to 95%. There's also the question of transporting the electricity efficiently. Still an interesting hypothetical question though. Maybe you could achieve the same effect more easily with mirrors.
- Arn_Thor 3y agoOn net I don’t think it makes a difference. When the energy is spent as electricity it basically releases heat in some form or other eventually
- wongarsu 3y agoHowever you might be able to kick the can down the road for another century or even millennium if you release the heat deep inside the earth. You could even achieve a similar effect with today's tech by running solar-powered heat pumps that pump the heat into deep bore holes or old oil wells. But that air conditioning the desert is a particularly great idea, but compared to better ideas like putting translucent reflective foil into orbit it had the charm that it has local effects you can achieve without international cooperation or incident
- fulafel 3y agoRadiation to space would be another possibility. But reflective paint would seem easier than a scheme to power arrays of space facing lasers using ultra high efficiency solar panels.
- gaiagraphia 3y agoI'm absolutely fascinated with all ideas which attempt to 'green the Sahara'. I personally think there should be a Manhattan project-esque attempt to fight back terraform our way out of climate change, and the Sahara should be centre stage. I've heard many times that the Amazon is dependent on the Sahara, but I don't think it's fair to sacrifice North Africa for an overabundance of life in South America. If you look at the globe from afar, the desert is like a scar which is spreading through the middle of the planet. It just seems unwise not to look at this as a threat. Other similar project to the OP include the Qatarra Depression project (and similar projects in Ethiopia and Tunisia), the new Nile Valley project (Toshka lakes), and rediverting the Congo Rier to replenish lake Chad. Also some cool ideas with planting Mangroves in coastal desert areas.
- tw04 3y agoSo we sacrifice hundreds of thousands of species in the rainforest for… more humans living in the Sahara? That might be great for a population expansion of humans in Africa, but it sounds pretty horrible for the overall health of the planet.
- gaiagraphia 3y agoWould it be a good trade off to double the species in the Amazon for doubling the size of the Sahara? Is the number of species the only metric on which the success of the planet should be based? That whole band of desert - from Mauritania to China - is spreading. Desert is death, and is barely any different to Mars. Imagine the absolute crisis the world will face when the likes of Spain become like Algeria, and the current migration trends intensify tenfold. We need to do a better job of adapting to what we have and living in ways which complement the terrain. The Sahara has lots of potential to support life and create sustainable thriving communities, but are being ignored as the world.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Desert is death, and is barely any different to Mars Fennec foxes are mighty cute [1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fennec_fox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fennec_fox
- tomohawk 3y agoIt's interesting how the reasons given to turn landscapes into hardscapes have changed over the years, and yet they rhyme. We used to justify building large dams to provide power, now we justify covering millions of acres.
- konschubert 3y agoBoth of these are good things. They create human prosperity without burning coal.
- jkoudys 3y ago[flagged]
- dang 3y agoCan you please make your substantive points without snark, name-calling, or fulmination? You may not owe bushy-eyebrowed smarmy tiktok-making jerks better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- palmfacehn 3y agoA solar chimney could be another approach. You would have the option of condensing the humid air directly inside of the structure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower
- alenrozac 3y agoIf only Pardot Kynes heard of this..
- 5F7bGnd6fWJ66xN 3y agoIs there an opportunity plant trees or vegetation in between the solar farms to increase this effect?
- missedthecue 3y agoIs it a good effect to have? Deserts are their own eco-systems. Although some deserts are encroaching onto green areas, but preventing/reversing that is a solved problem. China is reclaiming about half a million acres of Gobi Desert expansion annually with their Great Green Wall project. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Green_Wall_(China) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Green_Wall_(China)
- Log_out_ 3y agoWere is that on Google maps?
- ummonk 3y ago"One concern, however, is that the simulated solar panels were darker than most manufacturers make them. Some current solar panels are even reflective, designed to cool their surroundings, Lu says." That seems like a critical issue.