Comment on Replacing forests with solar a net positive, but neighbors bear an outsized burden, study finds

Olap@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• solo@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Meaning?

  source

  • Tobberone@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Perhaps that not a single reference to the article is about measuring the benefits of forests. Besides, the option should be putting solar in rooftops and above parking lots and above roads etc. Not taking pristine land for such a endeavour. That way we get the benefit of BOTH the solar farm and the forest, so almost 100% better.

    source

    • solo@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      If I get you correctly, I totally agree with what you say. I didn’t like the tone of this article in the sense that it presents it ok to clear out forest for solar panels, and personally I believe it’s criminal, or something. I just thought it had some important info.

      Thank you for giving me the chance to clarify where I stand on this.

      source
  • Olap@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    What’s your guess? What could possibly elicit such a response to an article like this?

    source

    • solo@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Anything I suppose, this is why I’m asking.

      I could be no, don’t cut the trees, or no, don’t talk bad about solar energy expansion, or… you name it! No?

      source

      • reksas@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        What point does solar energy have if one has to live without forests for it? I would rather have entire human society collapse than lose the nature to keep supporting the infinite growth of the cancer.

        source