6 ms·

The solar covered parking lots near me are great because they also serve as cover for your car when it’s hot and sunny. It’s not the most cost effective way to

• eclipticplane 7mo ago
  A better version for shade and city beautification is to force trees around/within the parking lot.
  • yearolinuxdsktp 7mo ago
    Tree shade means bird poop danger.
    • zzzoom 7mo ago
      Imagine considering some bird poop staining the paint dangerous instead of the air pollution that's slowly killing you.
      • XorNot 7mo ago
        [flagged]
        • ceejayoz 7mo ago
          Take a nice big sniff. CO2 and water are odorless.
        • defrost 7mo ago
          If gasoline engines burned their fuel as efficiently as possible, they would produce three by-products: water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrogen (N2). Unfortunately, engines do not run perfectly, and as a result, they also produce three by-products commonly referred to as the "terrible trio" of automotive pollutants. This trio includes the following: * Carbon monoxide (CO) – An odorless, tasteless, poisonous gas, carbon monoxide can cause a variety of health problems and even death. Many urban areas experience critically high levels of carbon monoxide, especially during the cold winter months when engines take longer to warm up and run cleanly * Unburned hydrocarbons (HC) – Responsible for causing a variety of respiratory problems, unburned hydrocarbons can also cause crop damage and promote the formation of smog * Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) – Like unburned hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen cause respiratory problems and promote the formation of smog * https://www.walkerexhaust.com/support/exhaust-101/exhaust-gases-101.html https://www.walkerexhaust.com/support/exhaust-101/exhaust-ga...
        • kulahan 7mo ago
          Have you ever seen an inversion? It’s crazy to imagine anyone who has, to end up thinking “maybe that shit-brown cloud stuck over the city is fine”.
          • wybiral 7mo ago
            Currently in Korea where the AQI is close to 200. Can confirm. Granted most of that is probably coal power plants and stuff but... All the more reason for more solar.
    • ProllyInfamous 7mo ago
      I recently built a 400sqft porch on my semi-urban duplex. Two birdnests have set up shop, both in my rafters (one on CCTV). My ceilinghooked bicycle will be decommissioned for this summer's nesters. Unfortunately, being the only porch/shade: the cats are also prowling... figuring out the rooftop connections. #PoopPorch2026
  • Kodiack 7mo ago
    I love seeing trees in more places, but for parking lots in particular they do have some downsides compared to solar panels. They often require more space; they attract birds that that poo on vehicles; and there’s a higher risk of collateral damage during windstorms. Not to mention that solar panels directly produce electricity, of course. We absolutely should see more trees in many cities, but they introduce their own challenges in parking lots, especially if they’re placed retroactively.
    • SecretDreams 7mo ago
      > they attract birds that that poo on vehicles The city can simply introduce lizards to manage to bird issue.
      • rglullis 7mo ago
        But then what are they going to do with the Gorillas? Are winters in Korea that cold?
        • SecretDreams 7mo ago
          Nighttime temps of -10c, I think we've got this locked! If not, send the saja boys after them.
          • aaronbrethorst 7mo ago
            Yes, but then who hunts the Huntr/x?
    • adrianN 7mo ago
      If you don’t want trees near parking cars that essentially prevents trees in cities, since cities are practically one big parking lot.
    • markerz 7mo ago
      > they attract birds that that poo on vehicles I think this is a tree density problem. Most cities have a small number of trees, and they’re almost always over cars. These are trees that line streets and parking lots. Without trees, birds just have telephone poles and wires, which are also over the cars. In San Francisco, we have a lot of trees on most of our streets, and many parks small and big, all full of trees. This means birds spread themselves out everywhere, not just over cars. I think the true barrier to getting more trees is that individuals tend not to want to pay for and maintain trees. This includes caring for the tree, trimming it when it gets bigger, and cleaning the pollen, leaves, fruits, and branches that fall.
  • jltsiren 7mo ago
    Trees can cause a lot of trouble if you don't give them enough space to grow. "Enough space" depends on the kind of the tree, but it's typically similar to a parking space. You can mandate trees, but then you'll get less parking.
    • maest 7mo ago
      > You can mandate trees, but then you'll get less parking. This implies we want to maximise car parking spaces in a city, when, I think, you'd want to maximise enjoyment of the city.
  • fouc 7mo ago
    A couple other comments warned of bird poop danger. But the smart entrepreneur will add a drive thru car wash next to the parking lot.
  • gonzo41 7mo ago
    People always end up petitioning for them to be cutdown because tree litter inevitably falls on cars. The best solution for cars is dense multistory parking.
    • kijin 7mo ago
      Dense multistory parking underground. In South Korea, you usually don't see parking lots the size of several football fields like in the U.S., even around venues that generally attract a lot of cars, even in suburban areas. Instead, there are several stories of parking lots under every large building. Above-ground space is simply too valuable to waste on parking. Unfortunately, you can't install solar panels underground.
      • ErroneousBosh 7mo ago
        > Dense multistory parking underground. I sometimes forget there are parts of the world where you can go more than about a metre down without breaking out the Kango hammer.
        • kijin 7mo ago
          Large parts of Seoul actually sit on very hard rock -- granite and gneiss from the Mesozoic era. But if the only alternative to blasting the bedrock is to pay through your nose for prime real estate, blast the bedrock you will.
  • dialogbox 7mo ago
    That's not possible in most of the parking lots of South Korea. It's extremely dense and no space for big enough trees to shade cars.
  • Mawr 7mo ago
    An even better version is to do away with the parking lot part and just have the trees.
    • blitzar 7mo ago
      Touch a parking lot doesn't have the same ring to it.
    • sulplisetalk 7mo ago
      Meowr! /s
    • drfloyd51 7mo ago
      Then how do show owners eat and pay their employees when no customers arrive because parking downtown is such a chore.
  • jmward01 7mo ago
    More trees often means less density which leads to worse cities. There is a place for trees, but 'more is better' is not true, especially around a parking lot which has already dropped the density massively. A parking lot is a city dead zone. Trees next to that will just expand that dead zone. It is like in the US where there are ornamental 'parks' at huge intersections. Nobody goes there. They didn't help. Same with parks around government buildings. SF is a great example of wasted space due to this. Generally, you need to minimize parking areas massively and then pack as much city next to them as possible to make up for the services they robbed. In the places where you actually do have exceptionally dense city then you can think about patches of green strategically placed. Getting a diverse, ecosystem like, city is the right approach but there is no hard and fast rule to get there.
    • gopher_space 7mo ago
      Everything south of San Francisco is either leaf-shaded or a shithole, and anyone who drives through California can see this stark discrepancy for themselves.
    • jmward01 7mo ago
      Is there any constructive counter to my arguments? It is a great area to discuss. We often think 'if a little is good then a lot is better' but clearly that isn't the case for basically every resource. Take the 'put trees everywhere' concept to the extreme and you have a forest, not a city. I am 100% in favor of putting trees and parks in a lot of city spaces, so long as it encourages the city and doesn't create or expand city dead zones. People should be using that green space regularly. Not their cars and the more infrastructure dedicated to cars and car support the less there is for people and people support. Trees in parking lots is car support, not people support. I have never once in my life wanted to drive to a parking lot for the trees in it and rarely want to take mass transit or walk to a parking lot next to a park since I would rather a park that has great restaurants and other services near it, not a bunch of concrete for cars. You have to minimize the impact of a parking lot quickly to get use out of it. Expanding its footprint with trees isn't doing that, it is actively making things worse.
  • ErroneousBosh 7mo ago
    Why not both?
    • aziaziazi 7mo ago
      They both are in competition for surface exposed to the sun. The mall’s parking lot near my place used to have trees. When they installed the solar panel shaders last year they cut down all of them.
      • ErroneousBosh 7mo ago
        I'm kind of struggling with the physics of this. The solar panels go over the parking spaces, like a kind of a bridge, with supports at the sides. There's a lot of space in between. If the trees were in the same space as the panels, they'd be in the midddle of the parking space. What you'd have then is not a car park, but just a plain ordinary park.
        • troupo 7mo ago
          > If the trees were in the same space as the panels, they'd be in the midddle of the parking space. What you'd have then is not a car park, but just a plain ordinary park. Sigh No, it's not. You can, and you should have trees in the middle of parking lots. Examples (and these are not even good examples): - https://maps.app.goo.gl/J4Ug8KyFcg8B481z5 https://maps.app.goo.gl/J4Ug8KyFcg8B481z5 - https://maps.app.goo.gl/Dm2faVYNbeWkivNK6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/Dm2faVYNbeWkivNK6 - https://maps.app.goo.gl/7DEYPKQFX8cNPD8n8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/7DEYPKQFX8cNPD8n8
        • aziaziazi 7mo ago
          I’m not sure to understand the design you’re talking about. The one I usually see have big supports each ~10/20 parking spot and the roof cover the spots but also overhang them by a few meters. Almost all space is exploited and you basically can’t see the sun anymore, which is the intent I suppose.
          • 7mo ago
• pfdietz 7mo ago
  I wonder if this will make it preferable to build parking structures rather than parking lots.
  • ceejayoz 7mo ago
    That is definitely not going to be easier or cheaper.
    • pfdietz 7mo ago
      Yes. I looked it up and I agree.
    • rmason 7mo ago
      They covered most of the parking lots with solar cells a few years back at nearby Michigan State. The economics weren't there, but as a friend who worked there pointed out they viewed it as research. It's great that when it snows you don't get nearly as much of the white stuff on your vehicle. But when it snows energy production slows to a crawl. We have a lot of snowy days a third of the year.
      • a_t48 7mo ago
        I wonder if there’s any situation where running heaters to keep the panels clear ends up with positive electricity generation. If nothing else it would help after the fact.
        • pfdietz 7mo ago
          I think I'd go with bifacial panels, which can absorb light from their back sides as well as the front. Snow would be a concern at higher latitude, so the panels would be tilted, and if one row were covered with snow it would tend to scatter sunlight toward the back of the row in from of it. Most of the scattered light still ends up as heat which would tend to melt the snow.
      • ceejayoz 7mo ago
• glenstein 7mo ago
  It's probably less expensive than field setups in large part due to siting near existing infrastructure. And it doesn't have to out compete residential, it just has to be a net positive investment on its own terms, out competing an otherwise unshaded parking lot that isn't leveraging it's airspace for anything. Rather than a tax on lots it's something that turns them into a source of revenue generation.
  • httpz 7mo ago
    In places with a lot of flat empty land, solar farms are a lot cheaper. South Korea doesn't have any flat empty land though..
• KennyBlanken 7mo ago
  There's a lot of entirely unsupported statements here that seem to be nothing more than uneducated opinion. You assume there's still a lot of rooftop space that doesn't already have solar on it. SK has very high population density and long started moving toward "less efficient" installs like balcony solar because most 'easy' rooftops already have solar on them. Remember: the rest of the world is way ahead of the US on this stuff. The UK for example regularly sees nearly 100% renewable powering of their grid plus 'recharging' their pumped hydro and BSS reserves. You declare that covered parking solar is more expensive than rooftop, with no supporting evidence whatsoever. Rooftop solar involves a great deal of site-specific design work, and a ton of on-site, dangerous labor, and usually has to meet tighter code standards. Rooftop work is some of the most dangerous work one can do; that makes it more expensive labor but also injuries and deaths have a substantial cost to society. And labor has to be more skilled. Parking lot solar setups can be almost entirely assembled in factories, highly standardized down to just about the ground. That reduces parts, eases supply chains, sales inventory, repairs, etc. Final bolt-together and wiring connections are fast, easy, and don't require skilled labor. "Bolt this stuff together, plug this into this." Used or partially damaged systems and their components can be easily repaired or reused elsewhere. Parking lot solar encompasses a LOT of panels which is more efficient as fixed costs are spread out more; rooftop solar is generally less-so because it's smaller and as mentioned involves a lot of site-specific work. You ignore the energy savings from the cars being much cooler and not needing to waste as much energy. Being shaded also means the paint, trim, interior, etc stay in better condition longer. You ignore that solar on-site coupled with EV chargers on site eliminates a lot of grid transmission losses. In theory a residential complex, employer, retail, or commercial site could set up something like this, pumping most of the energy into the cars parked underneath, and have a fairly small connection to the grid. Bifacial panels suspended well over the ground can collect a not-insignificant amount of energy from their underside. Solar panels suspended where they have lots of airflow over and under them run cooler, and produce more electricity. You don't seem very well informed on the subject and probably shouldn't be commenting so confidently.
  • tbrownaw 7mo ago
    > You ignore that solar on-site coupled with EV chargers on site eliminates a lot of grid transmission losses. In theory a residential complex, employer, retail, or commercial site could set up something like this, pumping most of the energy into the cars parked underneath, and have a fairly small connection to the grid. How many square yards of panels would one EV charger need an a typical afternoon / evening?
• ErroneousBosh 7mo ago
  > The solar covered parking lots near me are great because they also serve as cover for your car when it’s hot and sunny. I would like someone better at maths than I am to work out how much petrol this saves drivers because you're getting into a car that's been parked in the shade and not running the air conditioning so hard. I bet it's at least detectable, even if it's not much.
• sillyfluke 7mo ago
  >A tall structure designed to put the panels high up in the air and leave a lot of space for cars is a lot more expensive than normal rooftop solar or even field setups. Since you emphasized height of the structures that need to be built, I have trouble imagining some 10 feet poles and material to support the panels would make a drastic difference versus rooftop installations. What specifically in the details of the installations make significant additions in cost?
  • Rebelgecko 7mo ago
    The cost of the 10ft poles (at least in the US, SK might have different pricing), is drastically higher than the panels themselves