5 ms·

It's hard to argue with land use that will pay an owner 500-600% more than its existing use. But I would worry deeply about the sustainability of those rents. W

It's hard to argue with land use that will pay an owner 500-600% more than its existing use. But I would worry deeply about the sustainability of those rents. What happens when electricity prices dip and the solar companies go bankrupt? The land will basically never be able to be used as farmland again.

pinkgolem 2y ago
Why could you not reuse the farmland? The solar installations are usually not deeply rooted & the land below the panels is usually quit alive & well.. what am I missing?
- hanniabu 2y ago
  It'd probably be better for farmland because it'll have a break. Then again they'll probably continue spraying nasty herbicides to lower land maintenance around the panels.
  - NewJazz 2y ago
    Crazy how little effort people are willing to put in to maintain a healthy ecosystem on their property. The landscaper at the last apartment I rented literally tore out a perfectly healthy basil plant and sprayed herbicide everywhere.
  - Eric_WVGG 2y ago
    … read the article > Crews reshaped the landscape, spreading fine sand across large stretches of rich topsoil, Duttlinger said. When Reuters visited his farm last year and this spring, much of the land beneath the panels was covered in yellow-brown sand, where no plants grew. "I'll never be able to grow anything on that field again," the farmer said.
    - Robotbeat 2y ago
      ...is that actually scientifically true, or just a random thing a guy said?
    - Retric 2y ago
      That’s a nonsense issue. The plow is literally designed to swap the top layer of soil to kill off the existing plants and sand isn’t toxic. Nobody is wasting money to add a thick enough layer of sand to be a significant issue. And if they did you could just sell the sand. Further the guys making more money leasing the land than farming it, set some aside to pay for cleanup if he’s worried about it.
    - logifail 2y ago
      > … read the article >> "Crews reshaped the landscape, spreading fine sand across large stretches of rich topsoil, Duttlinger said" Where did the fine sand come from, how deep is the [alleged] spreading of it, how much of it did the panel installers [allegedly] bring with them? Can't help wishing we weren't quite so credulous....
  - kwhitefoot 2y ago
    That's weird. The solar farms that I see in Europe all have grass under the panels and in some cases grazing animals. Just let loose a few sheep.
- Nexxius 2y ago
  You're are not missing anything How Solar Panels Are Changing Agriculture - Agrivoltaics Revisited https://youtu.be/ww-_U7_oQbY?si=Qw6h4oJ5AMx6BoYQ https://youtu.be/ww-_U7_oQbY?si=Qw6h4oJ5AMx6BoYQ
- ProjectArcturis 2y ago
  You'd have support posts buried every 6 feet. Sure you could remove them, but at a cost of many thousands per acre. When the rent is hundreds per year. It just wouldn't be economically viable.
  - pinkgolem 2y ago
    Removing trees/posts for farmland has been done for 100dred of years and has always been financially viable Most of the farmland we have in Germany started out as forrest
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
It seems weird that the cost of the land would be that much. Shouldn't there be plenty of non-agricultural land to use for this? For example, any trees near high voltage transmission lines are cut down so the trees can't fall on the lines, causing them to be in direct sunlight. There are thousands of miles across the country. Why aren't there solar panels under all of them, and why would they be buying other land before using that? The land is already owned by the power company. It's practically free.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  They don’t cut down the trees, they trim them. Often with crazy helicopter chainsaws. Transmission lines tend to be in difficult to reach, undeveloped areas. They’re often not owned by the power company but rather used with easements. The power company might not be a generation company either. Building the hookup for thin lines of solar panels might not be cost effective either.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    > They don’t cut down the trees, they trim them. They cut down any trees within a certain number of feet of the power lines. This is done when the power lines are installed. Then they come back and periodically trim any trees that grow laterally into that area. > Transmission lines tend to be in difficult to reach, undeveloped areas. Not unlike agricultural land. Also not really true. Transmission lines tend to be near population centers, in order to supply power to them. There are more transmission lines per square mile in, say, New Jersey than there are in Montana. > They’re often not owned by the power company but rather used with easements. Enough of them are owned by the power company that we certainly haven't used them all yet. > The power company might not be a generation company either. In which case they could become one, or lease the land to one, which is free money to the power company but still a low price to the buyer because of the limited number of competing uses. > Building the hookup for thin lines of solar panels might not be cost effective either. Unclear what the layout has to do with anything. It's obviously possible to transfer an arbitrarily large amount of electricity in a straight line. If trying to minimize the number of inverters, panels could be wired in series to raise the DC voltage to whatever is appropriate to reach the distance to the inverter.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

pinkgolem 2y ago

Why could you not reuse the farmland? The solar installations are usually not deeply rooted & the land below the panels is usually quit alive & well.. what am I missing?

hanniabu 2y ago
It'd probably be better for farmland because it'll have a break. Then again they'll probably continue spraying nasty herbicides to lower land maintenance around the panels.
- NewJazz 2y ago
  Crazy how little effort people are willing to put in to maintain a healthy ecosystem on their property. The landscaper at the last apartment I rented literally tore out a perfectly healthy basil plant and sprayed herbicide everywhere.
- Eric_WVGG 2y ago
  … read the article > Crews reshaped the landscape, spreading fine sand across large stretches of rich topsoil, Duttlinger said. When Reuters visited his farm last year and this spring, much of the land beneath the panels was covered in yellow-brown sand, where no plants grew. "I'll never be able to grow anything on that field again," the farmer said.
  - Robotbeat 2y ago
    ...is that actually scientifically true, or just a random thing a guy said?
  - Retric 2y ago
    That’s a nonsense issue. The plow is literally designed to swap the top layer of soil to kill off the existing plants and sand isn’t toxic. Nobody is wasting money to add a thick enough layer of sand to be a significant issue. And if they did you could just sell the sand. Further the guys making more money leasing the land than farming it, set some aside to pay for cleanup if he’s worried about it.
  - logifail 2y ago
    > … read the article >> "Crews reshaped the landscape, spreading fine sand across large stretches of rich topsoil, Duttlinger said" Where did the fine sand come from, how deep is the [alleged] spreading of it, how much of it did the panel installers [allegedly] bring with them? Can't help wishing we weren't quite so credulous....
- kwhitefoot 2y ago
  That's weird. The solar farms that I see in Europe all have grass under the panels and in some cases grazing animals. Just let loose a few sheep.
Nexxius 2y ago
You're are not missing anything How Solar Panels Are Changing Agriculture - Agrivoltaics Revisited https://youtu.be/ww-_U7_oQbY?si=Qw6h4oJ5AMx6BoYQ https://youtu.be/ww-_U7_oQbY?si=Qw6h4oJ5AMx6BoYQ
ProjectArcturis 2y ago
You'd have support posts buried every 6 feet. Sure you could remove them, but at a cost of many thousands per acre. When the rent is hundreds per year. It just wouldn't be economically viable.
- pinkgolem 2y ago
  Removing trees/posts for farmland has been done for 100dred of years and has always been financially viable Most of the farmland we have in Germany started out as forrest

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

It seems weird that the cost of the land would be that much. Shouldn't there be plenty of non-agricultural land to use for this? For example, any trees near high voltage transmission lines are cut down so the trees can't fall on the lines, causing them to be in direct sunlight. There are thousands of miles across the country. Why aren't there solar panels under all of them, and why would they be buying other land before using that? The land is already owned by the power company. It's practically free.

jncfhnb 2y ago
They don’t cut down the trees, they trim them. Often with crazy helicopter chainsaws. Transmission lines tend to be in difficult to reach, undeveloped areas. They’re often not owned by the power company but rather used with easements. The power company might not be a generation company either. Building the hookup for thin lines of solar panels might not be cost effective either.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  > They don’t cut down the trees, they trim them. They cut down any trees within a certain number of feet of the power lines. This is done when the power lines are installed. Then they come back and periodically trim any trees that grow laterally into that area. > Transmission lines tend to be in difficult to reach, undeveloped areas. Not unlike agricultural land. Also not really true. Transmission lines tend to be near population centers, in order to supply power to them. There are more transmission lines per square mile in, say, New Jersey than there are in Montana. > They’re often not owned by the power company but rather used with easements. Enough of them are owned by the power company that we certainly haven't used them all yet. > The power company might not be a generation company either. In which case they could become one, or lease the land to one, which is free money to the power company but still a low price to the buyer because of the limited number of competing uses. > Building the hookup for thin lines of solar panels might not be cost effective either. Unclear what the layout has to do with anything. It's obviously possible to transfer an arbitrarily large amount of electricity in a straight line. If trying to minimize the number of inverters, panels could be wired in series to raise the DC voltage to whatever is appropriate to reach the distance to the inverter.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]