Main Takeaways.
> - In developed countries today, solar panels use a small fraction of the land relative to agriculture. This fraction is expected to stay small in the next several years even as proposed solar projects get built out. Nonetheless, because it’s often most practical to build solar farms on agricultural land, local conflicts may arise. > - Solar energy is more land-intensive than gas or nuclear power, but not significantly more than coal or hydropower. Additionally, some agricultural land is already used for energy production – to raise crops for ethanol – a process that’s significantly less efficient than solar energy. > - There’s no evidence that solar panels are toxic to the soil. While poor construction practices can degrade the land beneath solar panels, the panels themselves are inert. Solar panels only contain heavy metals in very small quantities, and they are designed to prevent those heavy metals from leaching into the soil even if they are crushed. > - Solar panels can exist on the same plot of land as other agricultural uses, such as cropland or grazing land for livestock. This practice is called agrivoltaics. Only a small number of today’s solar projects use agrivoltaics, but studies have demonstrated that some crops have higher yields when partly shaded by solar panels and that solar panels can help soil recover.
sj_zero 1 year ago
Of issues I have with solar, "we won't be able to farm" isn't one of them. The amount of space required for even gigawatt level solar farms is relatively trivial. I think I did the math and it was like 30km square or something, which is enough to convince a lot of greens it's a bad choice because it's big and ugly, but on a map isnt really that that much.