13 ms·

The American West is figuring out how to keep cool

50 points by pseudolus 2y ago

gedy 2y ago
Space sun shade? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade
NickC25 2y ago
Don't know, but such cities shouldn't be encouraging urban sprawl, should be insisting for solar panels on every roof possible, and at the same time shouldn't be incentivizing people to move there. I've lived in AZ, and it is nice in the winter, sure. But that's only a few months. It is hot as fuck in the warmer months and I to this day have no idea why people actually live there. the urban sprawl plus the fact that you have to drive everywhere, just blows my mind.
- throwaway22032 2y ago
  Arizona is a bit too warm for me, but a lot of people consider driving to be a positive. I would rather spend 15 mins in my car than 15 mins on a bus. I'd rather live in a place that is sprawling because then everything is bigger - I'd rather have a large house than a small one, a large garden than a small one, and I'd rather shop at a big box store that is more likely to allow me to be hands on with everything I need vs. a teeny high street shop and ordering online. I currently live somewhere quite urban and barely spend any time in the walkable/public transportable centre because there's not much I want to do there other than pubs and restaurants. edit: The responses to my post are kind of weird, I'm not telling you to adopt my preferences.
  - birdman3131 2y ago
    At least where I am 10 mins in a car can be up to 1.7 hours in a bus. And the same back. If it was an apples to apples comparison then I would rather be driven than drive. But its not.
    - NickC25 2y ago
      Take a bike. Might not be 10 minutes, but will be under 30. and cheaper than taking a bus, too.
      - birdman3131 2y ago
        Bikes are not great. Ebikes might be able to keep up with traffic but not legally. No bike lanes mean your in traffic with posted speeds of 35-40 MPH and actual speeds of 40-48 MPH. Not to say I disagree with bikes. Ive got all the parts for an ebike just need to mount them. But its not really viable transport around here if you add in the dangers.
      - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
        Taking a bike when it's 110 F out may be better than walking to a bus stop and then waiting for a bus, but it's still not something that many people want to do...
  - QuercusMax 2y ago
    How does that work if everyone wants that? We don't have enough Earths to support 8 billion people living in sprawl.
    - ssl-3 2y ago
      We might. If we have 54 million square kilometers of habitable land that is not used for agriculture, and we scatter 8 billion people across it, then we end up with a population density of about 148 people per square kilometer -- which is approximately what Florida is today.
      - QuercusMax 2y ago
        Do we have the resources to support such a sprawly civilization? It's not just the land, it's all the infrastructure (roads, plumbing, power, etc.) which isn't free.
        ssl-3 2y ago
        No, of course not. But the claim was about the unavailability of space, not of man-made infrastructure.
        QuercusMax 2y ago
        I said we don't have enough earths to support everyone living in sprawl. That's talking about resources, not just land.
      - jandrese 2y ago
        If that is your plan you need teleporters for everybody so you don't need to pave the world to get basic access.
        ssl-3 2y ago
        It's not my plan. I was just evaluating one aspect of its practicality. It would be a shitty idea to propose that everyone live in exactly the same way. Diversity is generally good. It's nice to have some options available. (Even with universal teleporters, diversity is generally good.)
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    Reworded: I love that my car lets me travel alone and without paying the full cost of the miles I log. I'm either terrified of public transit and/or the experiences I've had on it have generally sucked. I prefer bigger everything because I rarely think about the downsides and externalities, and was told from birth that bigger is better. I prefer a large house as long because I can afford somebody else to clean and maintain it, along with the utility bills and property taxes. I prefer a larger garden under the same conditions. I prefer stores that dominate and distort the market and allow me to avoid human interactions.
    - throwaway22032 2y ago
      It would be more polite and useful to ask me to clarify rather than producing a strawman. I don't prefer driving because it is inexpensive, I prefer it because it has greater utility for me. If the cost of fuel doubled or more I would still do it, I'd just be a bit more efficient with the journeys I do make. I'm not terrified of the tube/trains/buses, I use them. It's just a bit shit, doesn't go to loads of places I want to go, and is generally less comfortable. I do think that bigger is better. I don't pay for someone to clean or maintain my house, I do it myself. I haven't been told that bigger is better, it simply is. For example, just yesterday I made a table. In order to do that I needed enough space to work in and store my tools. I could not do this in a smaller house or apartment. Theoretically I could hire a workshop or go to a hackspace but that would be substantially more hassle than just walking into my garden or the garage or whatever. I like human interactions. Just not with endless hordes in a super dense city centre. I prefer chatting with my neighbours, or someone on a hiking trail, or having people over, etc. It sounds as if you just have different preferences to me. Different hobbies, desires, etc. That's fine, that's why you don't prefer driving. I do.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
        I live in a small village of 250 people in rural New Mexico, 25 miles from the nearest town. To get to almost anywhere I have to drive. When I socialize, it is mostly with neighbors or people on hiking trails. I have a large set of tools out back and space to use them. Don't assume that my preferences are so different from yours (though your use of "the tube" suggests that you're located in SE England, so many things may be different). My point was that all the preferences you expressed come with a cost, not only to you, but to everything and everyone else as well. Talking about these things as if they are merely personal choices is misleading, they are actually personal choices that, in aggregate, shape the world we all get to live in. And the specific set of choices that you listed, for the most part, in aggregate, have a negative impact on the world. I'm a participant in that too, clearly.
- bcrosby95 2y ago
  I'm curious, do you feel the same for places that reach 40F? 30F? Because heating is a bigger problem than cooling when it comes to contributions towards climate change. Why do I only ever see people railing against people living in hot places, rather than people living in cold places?
  - jedberg 2y ago
    It's a lot easier to add heat to survive in a cold place than take away heat in a hot place. Kinda like how people complain in an office "Can we turn down the thermostat? You can put on a coat but I can't take my skin off".
    - maxbond 2y ago
      Additionally, when you add new construction to a hot place, the additional sidewalk and asphalt makes it hotter. Adding new construction to a cold place doesn't make it colder.
    - brianshaler 2y ago
      I think the point GP was making was that hot daytime temperatures in desert climates tend to coincide with peak renewable energy generation, while at higher latitudes in cloudier places the the source of energy is more likely to be from combustion.
      - bluefirebrand 2y ago
        If we're only worried about temperature, sure But fresh water is a pretty huge concern as well and moving/producing large amounts of that in extremely hot areas is going to more than offset the difference in heating costs
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      Given the heat pump technology that we have these days, moving heat from A to B is roughly the same as moving it from B to A.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  No real issue with installing solar, but the panels are dark. Won't that contribute to the heat island effect, especially considering that among the remediations proposed are white roofs and pavement?
  - brianshaler 2y ago
    A decade or two ago there was a push to paint as many roofs white as possible, which is why you may intuit dark is bad. Black surfaces convert absorb light energy and convert it into heat. Solar panels do get hot, but part of the point is to turn as much of that light energy as possible into electrical energy.
- dyauspitr 2y ago
  I much prefer hot af to an icy hellhole. Heating takes up a huge amount of energy and you can’t really do it in an environmentally friendly way unless you get creative. The good thing about the heat is when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy. It’s a cooling solution that scales itself with the temperature.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    > The good thing about the heat is when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy. Incorrect. Peak PV efficiency occurs at relatively low temperatures. Perhaps you mean "when it is hot, there tends to be lots of sunshine, and so there's lot of PV generation" ? That's true of some places (Southern CA, AZ, NV, NM) but less true of others (Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia etc).
  - accrual 2y ago
    > when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy That's not true. > It may seem counterintuitive, but solar panel efficiency is negatively affected by temperature increases. Photovoltaic modules are tested at a temperature of 25° C - about 77° F, and depending on their installed location, heat can reduce output efficiency by 10-25%. As the solar panel's temperature increases, its output current increases exponentially while the voltage output decreases linearly. In fact, voltage reduction is so predictable that it can be used to measure temperature accurately. [0] > Home solar panels are tested at 25 °C (77 °F), and thus solar panel temperature will generally range between 15 °C and 35 °C during which solar cells will produce at maximum efficiency. However, solar panels can get as hot as 65 °C (149 °F), at which point solar cell efficiency will be hindered. [1] [0] https://www.greentechrenewables.com/article/how-does-heat-affect-solar-panel-efficiencies https://www.greentechrenewables.com/article/how-does-heat-af... [1] https://www.energysage.com/solar/solar-panel-temperature-overheating/ https://www.energysage.com/solar/solar-panel-temperature-ove...
    - dyauspitr 2y ago
      Either ways, if it’s hot there is going to be a lot of uninterrupted sunlight.
- hosh 2y ago
  I live in Phoenix now. My wife and I are planning to move away from here in two years. We were only here because of circumstances outside of our control and now those circumstances are no longer applicable. Phoenix's main economic driver is real estate development and speculation since the 60s. It has very little in the way of real wealth that serves as a foundation (other than ASU and the two silicon fabs that are there now). A lot of people come here thinking it is affordable cost of living (and it is not that affordable in 2024), but I don't think many residents here really know why they live in Phoenix either.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    Best time to get out of a market is before everyone else is running for the door. Lots of stranded assets and sadness ahead for folks who held on to assets too long in the wrong places. https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/28/are-we-in-the-midst-of-a-climate-housing-bubble/ https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/28/are-we-in-the-midst-o... http://www.deltaterracapital.com/ http://www.deltaterracapital.com/
voisin 2y ago
The answer is trees everywhere in numbers that you don’t find in western cities. Like 100x the number of trees normally found in a city. The benefits aren’t just in temperature but also air quality, biodiversity, etc etc. Edit: for those saying “But there’s not enough water”, I strongly suggest reading “Rainwater Harvesting in Drylands and Beyond” written by Brad Lancaster in Arizona. For those who don’t want to read the book, check out his TED Talk here (warning: his enthusiasm is infectious and you’ll want to read the book afterward): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2xDZlpInik https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2xDZlpInik
- turnsout 2y ago
  Works really well as long as you can find trees that don't consume water. The challenge in these western cities is that they don't even have enough water to run the taps. The reality is that the western US should not be this populated, period.
  - ch4s3 2y ago
    That's exactly what Phoenix is doing[1], well not no water but they're native and use very little. [1] https://www.phoenix.gov/oepsite/Documents/Tree%20and%20Shade%20Master%20Plan.pdf#search=Tree%20and%20Shade%20master%20Plan https://www.phoenix.gov/oepsite/Documents/Tree%20and%20Shade...
    - hosh 2y ago
      I live in Phoenix, and have seen the tree planting. There is a lot more that could be done that is not done. From my eyes, it looks more like, there are X number of trees that need to be planted and they are planted to fulfill those goals. There is little in the way of consideration for sunlight patterns, rainwater patterns, microclimates, planting methods, etc.
      - voisin 2y ago
        While imperfect sounding, just getting trees in the ground and then moving the goalposts to constantly increase the number, is a huge step forward. I think once in the ground, nature will take over and adapt.
thisisauserid 2y ago
Those Japanese Air conditioned suits are starting to sound practical.
- azinman2 2y ago
  link?
jedberg 2y ago
One law that passed after the 1994 earthquake in LA was that not only did new construction and remodels have to have all the latest earthquake safety features, but any house sold did too. You couldn't sell a house without doing the earthquake retrofit. They should pass a similar law with some environmental requirements. The same ones that they are requiring on new construction and retrofits should also be required on sale. That would at least help.
- Marsymars 2y ago
  Maybe, but I think the minimum code standards are in general too low. e.g. I bought a house 2 years ago where they'd replaced all the windows with double pane windows prior to selling. I'd have happily paid the marginal difference to get top-end windows, but now that I've got all new code-compliant windows, it doesn't make sense for me to upgrade them again for at least another decade.
- fckgw 2y ago
  They are passing those laws. As of 2020 all new construction homes sold in California must have a solar system installed. Also in many parts there's strict requirements on what type of landscaping they can have (no grass, only specific plants and drip irrigation allowed).
ordinaryradical 2y ago
I find this article extremely ironic and one-dimensional because LA is currently having a record setting year for cold. As someone convinced by the science of climate change, I’m now increasingly skeptical of how the media portrays its nuance and uncerainty, particularly at the localized and regional level. It would not surprise me at this point to find out in years’ time that a place like LA cools dramatically because of second and third order effects on precipitation that were not accurately accounted for while the planet overall still warms. And I think that’s what makes the kind of prescriptivism of this article a bit nauseating. I’m down to prevent the poor and elderly from dying of heatstroke but I question the rhetoric of this article in the way it is argued.
- brisketbbq 2y ago
  > I’m down to prevent the poor and elderly from dying of heatstroke And i also assume from freezing to death? First hand experience tells me that living outside in a large metro city during the summer was easier than trying to stay warm in the same city during the really cold nights. I'm not saying it was _enjoyable_ during the summer, but I didn't have the concern of hypothermia during those really cold early mornings.
hprotagonist 2y ago
https://reasonstobecheerful.world/green-corridors-medellin-colombia-urban-heat/ https://reasonstobecheerful.world/green-corridors-medellin-c.... plant vegetation.
greekanalyst 2y ago
This is a big problem we are facing in Greece too, especially in our concrete jungle (Athens). Summers are not just unbearable, but becoming dangerous too. Extreme weather events are here to stay and we need to find smart ways to handle them. We also need to prepare for a way of life that is different than what we are used to, including the social/economic ramifications of these environmental changes.
dublinben 2y ago
There's a lot of talk about painting pavement white, but no mention of ripping it out and replacing cars with other forms of transportation. Internal combustion engine vehicles themselves turn 100% of the energy from gasoline into heat, localized to the roads they are driving on. This pumps billions of BTUs of heat directly into a city on a daily basis.[0] We could start cooling these cities down by not unnecessarily heating them up in the first place. [0] https://www.treehugger.com/cars-add-heat-to-cities-ban-them-5680313 https://www.treehugger.com/cars-add-heat-to-cities-ban-them-...
- resource_waste 2y ago
  The rich move to the city, the poor are squeezed out. The poor take long dreaded commutes that make them pay premiums for early/late daycare times and the long commute makes it difficult to find time to look for new jobs. I make tons of money, I'd do great in your fantastic city. I stopped caring about the lower class last year. Your proposal is fine to me. Just don't do a bunch of terrible bandaid things that mess up the economy in 20 years because you created a socioeconomic divide.
  - threatofrain 2y ago
    Because public transportation would be the enemy of the poor?
- lifeisgood99 2y ago
  All our energy usage turns to heat. Best to stay immobile.
- anamexis 2y ago
  Is there any evidence that the heat from cars directly contributes meaningfully to temperature in cities? I’m genuinely curious (but skeptical). Edit: Some back of the envelope math: Article says cars add 1.2 * 10^6 BTU of heat per day to Manhattan. Some rough math on my part suggests that Manhattan gets about 5.6 * 10^11 BTU of heat per day from the sun, 5 orders of magnitude more. The heat directly generated by cars is a rounding error.
s5300 2y ago
[dead]
sandworm101 2y ago
All this talk about re-zoning, increasing green spaces and limiting sprawl is not helpful. Imho such long-term planning considerations are just a means of delaying action. Cities need things that can be implemented and show results in years, not decades. We must adapt the cities largely as they stand today. Quick solutions are things like painting surfaces white, insulating buildings and connecting spaces via enclosed walkways to minimize loss of AC air. Other options can be more regulatory, such as allowing people to install shades over windows irrespective of local zoning rules.
vl 2y ago
This article talks a lot about “cool roof” but doesn’t actually tell what it is. A "cool roof" is a roofing system designed to reflect more sunlight and absorb less heat than a standard roof. Cool roofs are typically made of materials or coatings that have high solar reflectance (the ability to reflect visible, infrared, and ultraviolet wavelengths of sunlight) and high thermal emittance (the ability to radiate absorbed or non-reflected solar energy). It makes me wonder what is a good roof design for more northern areas - i.e. in Seattle you want “cool roof” in the summer and “hot roof” in the winter.
- HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
  Nope. You'd just want enough insulation that it didn't make a difference.
8f2ab37a-ed6c 2y ago
Come to SF, we're freezing most of the year here.
gmuslera 2y ago
There is a bigger problem going on that is still not thoroughly addressed. Heat domes, heavy rain floods, strong winds and other extreme weather effects are becoming more disruptive and frequent, and mitigating just one of the today symptoms without addressing the core problem may be pretty shortsighted.

50 points by pseudolus 2y ago

gedy 2y ago

Space sun shade? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade

Don't know, but such cities shouldn't be encouraging urban sprawl, should be insisting for solar panels on every roof possible, and at the same time shouldn't be incentivizing people to move there. I've lived in AZ, and it is nice in the winter, sure. But that's only a few months. It is hot as fuck in the warmer months and I to this day have no idea why people actually live there. the urban sprawl plus the fact that you have to drive everywhere, just blows my mind.

throwaway22032 2y ago
Arizona is a bit too warm for me, but a lot of people consider driving to be a positive. I would rather spend 15 mins in my car than 15 mins on a bus. I'd rather live in a place that is sprawling because then everything is bigger - I'd rather have a large house than a small one, a large garden than a small one, and I'd rather shop at a big box store that is more likely to allow me to be hands on with everything I need vs. a teeny high street shop and ordering online. I currently live somewhere quite urban and barely spend any time in the walkable/public transportable centre because there's not much I want to do there other than pubs and restaurants. edit: The responses to my post are kind of weird, I'm not telling you to adopt my preferences.
- birdman3131 2y ago
  At least where I am 10 mins in a car can be up to 1.7 hours in a bus. And the same back. If it was an apples to apples comparison then I would rather be driven than drive. But its not.
  - NickC25 2y ago
    Take a bike. Might not be 10 minutes, but will be under 30. and cheaper than taking a bus, too.
    - birdman3131 2y ago
      Bikes are not great. Ebikes might be able to keep up with traffic but not legally. No bike lanes mean your in traffic with posted speeds of 35-40 MPH and actual speeds of 40-48 MPH. Not to say I disagree with bikes. Ive got all the parts for an ebike just need to mount them. But its not really viable transport around here if you add in the dangers.
    - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
      Taking a bike when it's 110 F out may be better than walking to a bus stop and then waiting for a bus, but it's still not something that many people want to do...
- QuercusMax 2y ago
  How does that work if everyone wants that? We don't have enough Earths to support 8 billion people living in sprawl.
  - ssl-3 2y ago
    We might. If we have 54 million square kilometers of habitable land that is not used for agriculture, and we scatter 8 billion people across it, then we end up with a population density of about 148 people per square kilometer -- which is approximately what Florida is today.
    - QuercusMax 2y ago
      Do we have the resources to support such a sprawly civilization? It's not just the land, it's all the infrastructure (roads, plumbing, power, etc.) which isn't free.
      - ssl-3 2y ago
        No, of course not. But the claim was about the unavailability of space, not of man-made infrastructure.
        QuercusMax 2y ago
        I said we don't have enough earths to support everyone living in sprawl. That's talking about resources, not just land.
    - jandrese 2y ago
      If that is your plan you need teleporters for everybody so you don't need to pave the world to get basic access.
      - ssl-3 2y ago
        It's not my plan. I was just evaluating one aspect of its practicality. It would be a shitty idea to propose that everyone live in exactly the same way. Diversity is generally good. It's nice to have some options available. (Even with universal teleporters, diversity is generally good.)
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  Reworded: I love that my car lets me travel alone and without paying the full cost of the miles I log. I'm either terrified of public transit and/or the experiences I've had on it have generally sucked. I prefer bigger everything because I rarely think about the downsides and externalities, and was told from birth that bigger is better. I prefer a large house as long because I can afford somebody else to clean and maintain it, along with the utility bills and property taxes. I prefer a larger garden under the same conditions. I prefer stores that dominate and distort the market and allow me to avoid human interactions.
  - throwaway22032 2y ago
    It would be more polite and useful to ask me to clarify rather than producing a strawman. I don't prefer driving because it is inexpensive, I prefer it because it has greater utility for me. If the cost of fuel doubled or more I would still do it, I'd just be a bit more efficient with the journeys I do make. I'm not terrified of the tube/trains/buses, I use them. It's just a bit shit, doesn't go to loads of places I want to go, and is generally less comfortable. I do think that bigger is better. I don't pay for someone to clean or maintain my house, I do it myself. I haven't been told that bigger is better, it simply is. For example, just yesterday I made a table. In order to do that I needed enough space to work in and store my tools. I could not do this in a smaller house or apartment. Theoretically I could hire a workshop or go to a hackspace but that would be substantially more hassle than just walking into my garden or the garage or whatever. I like human interactions. Just not with endless hordes in a super dense city centre. I prefer chatting with my neighbours, or someone on a hiking trail, or having people over, etc. It sounds as if you just have different preferences to me. Different hobbies, desires, etc. That's fine, that's why you don't prefer driving. I do.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      I live in a small village of 250 people in rural New Mexico, 25 miles from the nearest town. To get to almost anywhere I have to drive. When I socialize, it is mostly with neighbors or people on hiking trails. I have a large set of tools out back and space to use them. Don't assume that my preferences are so different from yours (though your use of "the tube" suggests that you're located in SE England, so many things may be different). My point was that all the preferences you expressed come with a cost, not only to you, but to everything and everyone else as well. Talking about these things as if they are merely personal choices is misleading, they are actually personal choices that, in aggregate, shape the world we all get to live in. And the specific set of choices that you listed, for the most part, in aggregate, have a negative impact on the world. I'm a participant in that too, clearly.
bcrosby95 2y ago
I'm curious, do you feel the same for places that reach 40F? 30F? Because heating is a bigger problem than cooling when it comes to contributions towards climate change. Why do I only ever see people railing against people living in hot places, rather than people living in cold places?
- jedberg 2y ago
  It's a lot easier to add heat to survive in a cold place than take away heat in a hot place. Kinda like how people complain in an office "Can we turn down the thermostat? You can put on a coat but I can't take my skin off".
  - maxbond 2y ago
    Additionally, when you add new construction to a hot place, the additional sidewalk and asphalt makes it hotter. Adding new construction to a cold place doesn't make it colder.
  - brianshaler 2y ago
    I think the point GP was making was that hot daytime temperatures in desert climates tend to coincide with peak renewable energy generation, while at higher latitudes in cloudier places the the source of energy is more likely to be from combustion.
    - bluefirebrand 2y ago
      If we're only worried about temperature, sure But fresh water is a pretty huge concern as well and moving/producing large amounts of that in extremely hot areas is going to more than offset the difference in heating costs
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    Given the heat pump technology that we have these days, moving heat from A to B is roughly the same as moving it from B to A.
SoftTalker 2y ago
No real issue with installing solar, but the panels are dark. Won't that contribute to the heat island effect, especially considering that among the remediations proposed are white roofs and pavement?
- brianshaler 2y ago
  A decade or two ago there was a push to paint as many roofs white as possible, which is why you may intuit dark is bad. Black surfaces convert absorb light energy and convert it into heat. Solar panels do get hot, but part of the point is to turn as much of that light energy as possible into electrical energy.
dyauspitr 2y ago
I much prefer hot af to an icy hellhole. Heating takes up a huge amount of energy and you can’t really do it in an environmentally friendly way unless you get creative. The good thing about the heat is when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy. It’s a cooling solution that scales itself with the temperature.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  > The good thing about the heat is when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy. Incorrect. Peak PV efficiency occurs at relatively low temperatures. Perhaps you mean "when it is hot, there tends to be lots of sunshine, and so there's lot of PV generation" ? That's true of some places (Southern CA, AZ, NV, NM) but less true of others (Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia etc).
- accrual 2y ago
  > when it’s the hottest, solar panels generate the most energy That's not true. > It may seem counterintuitive, but solar panel efficiency is negatively affected by temperature increases. Photovoltaic modules are tested at a temperature of 25° C - about 77° F, and depending on their installed location, heat can reduce output efficiency by 10-25%. As the solar panel's temperature increases, its output current increases exponentially while the voltage output decreases linearly. In fact, voltage reduction is so predictable that it can be used to measure temperature accurately. [0] > Home solar panels are tested at 25 °C (77 °F), and thus solar panel temperature will generally range between 15 °C and 35 °C during which solar cells will produce at maximum efficiency. However, solar panels can get as hot as 65 °C (149 °F), at which point solar cell efficiency will be hindered. [1] [0] https://www.greentechrenewables.com/article/how-does-heat-affect-solar-panel-efficiencies https://www.greentechrenewables.com/article/how-does-heat-af... [1] https://www.energysage.com/solar/solar-panel-temperature-overheating/ https://www.energysage.com/solar/solar-panel-temperature-ove...
  - dyauspitr 2y ago
    Either ways, if it’s hot there is going to be a lot of uninterrupted sunlight.
hosh 2y ago
I live in Phoenix now. My wife and I are planning to move away from here in two years. We were only here because of circumstances outside of our control and now those circumstances are no longer applicable. Phoenix's main economic driver is real estate development and speculation since the 60s. It has very little in the way of real wealth that serves as a foundation (other than ASU and the two silicon fabs that are there now). A lot of people come here thinking it is affordable cost of living (and it is not that affordable in 2024), but I don't think many residents here really know why they live in Phoenix either.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  Best time to get out of a market is before everyone else is running for the door. Lots of stranded assets and sadness ahead for folks who held on to assets too long in the wrong places. https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/28/are-we-in-the-midst-of-a-climate-housing-bubble/ https://www.marketplace.org/2024/05/28/are-we-in-the-midst-o... http://www.deltaterracapital.com/ http://www.deltaterracapital.com/

voisin 2y ago

The answer is trees everywhere in numbers that you don’t find in western cities. Like 100x the number of trees normally found in a city. The benefits aren’t just in temperature but also air quality, biodiversity, etc etc. Edit: for those saying “But there’s not enough water”, I strongly suggest reading “Rainwater Harvesting in Drylands and Beyond” written by Brad Lancaster in Arizona. For those who don’t want to read the book, check out his TED Talk here (warning: his enthusiasm is infectious and you’ll want to read the book afterward): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2xDZlpInik https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I2xDZlpInik

turnsout 2y ago
Works really well as long as you can find trees that don't consume water. The challenge in these western cities is that they don't even have enough water to run the taps. The reality is that the western US should not be this populated, period.
- ch4s3 2y ago
  That's exactly what Phoenix is doing[1], well not no water but they're native and use very little. [1] https://www.phoenix.gov/oepsite/Documents/Tree%20and%20Shade%20Master%20Plan.pdf#search=Tree%20and%20Shade%20master%20Plan https://www.phoenix.gov/oepsite/Documents/Tree%20and%20Shade...
  - hosh 2y ago
    I live in Phoenix, and have seen the tree planting. There is a lot more that could be done that is not done. From my eyes, it looks more like, there are X number of trees that need to be planted and they are planted to fulfill those goals. There is little in the way of consideration for sunlight patterns, rainwater patterns, microclimates, planting methods, etc.
    - voisin 2y ago
      While imperfect sounding, just getting trees in the ground and then moving the goalposts to constantly increase the number, is a huge step forward. I think once in the ground, nature will take over and adapt.

thisisauserid 2y ago

Those Japanese Air conditioned suits are starting to sound practical.

azinman2 2y ago
link?

jedberg 2y ago

One law that passed after the 1994 earthquake in LA was that not only did new construction and remodels have to have all the latest earthquake safety features, but any house sold did too. You couldn't sell a house without doing the earthquake retrofit. They should pass a similar law with some environmental requirements. The same ones that they are requiring on new construction and retrofits should also be required on sale. That would at least help.

Marsymars 2y ago
Maybe, but I think the minimum code standards are in general too low. e.g. I bought a house 2 years ago where they'd replaced all the windows with double pane windows prior to selling. I'd have happily paid the marginal difference to get top-end windows, but now that I've got all new code-compliant windows, it doesn't make sense for me to upgrade them again for at least another decade.
fckgw 2y ago
They are passing those laws. As of 2020 all new construction homes sold in California must have a solar system installed. Also in many parts there's strict requirements on what type of landscaping they can have (no grass, only specific plants and drip irrigation allowed).

ordinaryradical 2y ago

I find this article extremely ironic and one-dimensional because LA is currently having a record setting year for cold. As someone convinced by the science of climate change, I’m now increasingly skeptical of how the media portrays its nuance and uncerainty, particularly at the localized and regional level. It would not surprise me at this point to find out in years’ time that a place like LA cools dramatically because of second and third order effects on precipitation that were not accurately accounted for while the planet overall still warms. And I think that’s what makes the kind of prescriptivism of this article a bit nauseating. I’m down to prevent the poor and elderly from dying of heatstroke but I question the rhetoric of this article in the way it is argued.

brisketbbq 2y ago
> I’m down to prevent the poor and elderly from dying of heatstroke And i also assume from freezing to death? First hand experience tells me that living outside in a large metro city during the summer was easier than trying to stay warm in the same city during the really cold nights. I'm not saying it was _enjoyable_ during the summer, but I didn't have the concern of hypothermia during those really cold early mornings.

hprotagonist 2y ago

https://reasonstobecheerful.world/green-corridors-medellin-colombia-urban-heat/ https://reasonstobecheerful.world/green-corridors-medellin-c.... plant vegetation.

greekanalyst 2y ago

This is a big problem we are facing in Greece too, especially in our concrete jungle (Athens). Summers are not just unbearable, but becoming dangerous too. Extreme weather events are here to stay and we need to find smart ways to handle them. We also need to prepare for a way of life that is different than what we are used to, including the social/economic ramifications of these environmental changes.

dublinben 2y ago

There's a lot of talk about painting pavement white, but no mention of ripping it out and replacing cars with other forms of transportation. Internal combustion engine vehicles themselves turn 100% of the energy from gasoline into heat, localized to the roads they are driving on. This pumps billions of BTUs of heat directly into a city on a daily basis.[0] We could start cooling these cities down by not unnecessarily heating them up in the first place. [0] https://www.treehugger.com/cars-add-heat-to-cities-ban-them-5680313 https://www.treehugger.com/cars-add-heat-to-cities-ban-them-...

resource_waste 2y ago
The rich move to the city, the poor are squeezed out. The poor take long dreaded commutes that make them pay premiums for early/late daycare times and the long commute makes it difficult to find time to look for new jobs. I make tons of money, I'd do great in your fantastic city. I stopped caring about the lower class last year. Your proposal is fine to me. Just don't do a bunch of terrible bandaid things that mess up the economy in 20 years because you created a socioeconomic divide.
- threatofrain 2y ago
  Because public transportation would be the enemy of the poor?
lifeisgood99 2y ago
All our energy usage turns to heat. Best to stay immobile.
anamexis 2y ago
Is there any evidence that the heat from cars directly contributes meaningfully to temperature in cities? I’m genuinely curious (but skeptical). Edit: Some back of the envelope math: Article says cars add 1.2 * 10^6 BTU of heat per day to Manhattan. Some rough math on my part suggests that Manhattan gets about 5.6 * 10^11 BTU of heat per day from the sun, 5 orders of magnitude more. The heat directly generated by cars is a rounding error.

s5300 2y ago

[dead]

sandworm101 2y ago

All this talk about re-zoning, increasing green spaces and limiting sprawl is not helpful. Imho such long-term planning considerations are just a means of delaying action. Cities need things that can be implemented and show results in years, not decades. We must adapt the cities largely as they stand today. Quick solutions are things like painting surfaces white, insulating buildings and connecting spaces via enclosed walkways to minimize loss of AC air. Other options can be more regulatory, such as allowing people to install shades over windows irrespective of local zoning rules.

vl 2y ago

This article talks a lot about “cool roof” but doesn’t actually tell what it is. A "cool roof" is a roofing system designed to reflect more sunlight and absorb less heat than a standard roof. Cool roofs are typically made of materials or coatings that have high solar reflectance (the ability to reflect visible, infrared, and ultraviolet wavelengths of sunlight) and high thermal emittance (the ability to radiate absorbed or non-reflected solar energy). It makes me wonder what is a good roof design for more northern areas - i.e. in Seattle you want “cool roof” in the summer and “hot roof” in the winter.

HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
Nope. You'd just want enough insulation that it didn't make a difference.

8f2ab37a-ed6c 2y ago

Come to SF, we're freezing most of the year here.

gmuslera 2y ago

There is a bigger problem going on that is still not thoroughly addressed. Heat domes, heavy rain floods, strong winds and other extreme weather effects are becoming more disruptive and frequent, and mitigating just one of the today symptoms without addressing the core problem may be pretty shortsighted.