Submitted 1 week ago by Cat@ponder.cat to science@mander.xyz
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2515-7620/adb7bd
Because Golf Courses are usually built in low cost locations in high cost areas. Like flood plains. There’s only so many things you can reasonably build in flood plains, golf courses are one of them. Have you ever noticed that golf courses are often next to lakes and rivers?
Also, what is with the European need to optimize every square inch of land? Y’all still have abandoned buildings!
Can leave it as a public park instead of a private endeavor that the public can’t access.
Such an inanely dumb “sport”.
Money talks.
One was here long af. Other is new.
How can be more if one than the other? :o
The one that’s been here long af has also been considered to be environmentally and socially problematic for long af.
Golf courses should have been dismantled long ago.
One costs massive amounts of water to maintain. Other brings free green energy.
How can be more if one than the other? (sic)
They also use more land for just about every sport and recreational activity that requires a dedicated facility.
Unless the area is out of space, and the golf course existing is the only reason why a given wind/solar project isn’t going forward, the comparison is pretty useless.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 1 week ago
Are they incompatible?
Put a wind turbine on a gold course as a new hazard or something.
sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
Windmills in mini-golf but for real this time