Covering large parking lots with solar panels is an idea that goes back decades but in America at least it’s an idea that has never really taken off.
What is the reason for that? Is it due to the overall cost or is there something else that keeps Walmart, Target, Costco, Sams Club, Malls, etc. from covering their parking lots with these panels and selling the power?
You must log in or register to comment.
One of the Costco locations in Albuquerque has a solar covered parking lot. Inside they have a meter showing how much of their used electricity is from the solar.
Yeah, places with lots of sunshine are more likely to do stuff like this. I recently visited Tucson, AZ, and the amount of solar panel coverage all over the place was very impressive. Both rooftops and parking lots.
Making the panels high enough off the ground with sparse enough supports to be convenient adds a lot of expense. I mainly see it in paid parking lots where the shade can be sold as a value add.
There’s an rei that does it near me, and it looks like they also save money on plowing in the winter. The spots don’t really get snow because of the cover, and the aisles are generally passable because traffic
Basically solar panels need structural support.
To cover a parking lot, you must build the supports from scratch. To cover an existing rooftop, the structure’s already there.
It’s slightly more complicated but that’s the basic reason.
Supports are nothing compared to the electrical infrastructure needed to actually use the solar power. Adding solar to a commercial 3 phase switchgear is a massive headache.
in places that have large open lot retail developments, it’s very likely you could just install the solar panels on undeveloped land a few miles away.
why would you complicate both efforts by trying to intertwine them?
Or if you do them on site, there’s a roof on the store that you can use first, without needing to do construction work. Covering the parking spaces requires some measure of construction work, underground electrical work, etc that could end up being pretty expensive compared to alternatives.
That assumes the buildings can handle them. A company I used to work for was planning to put solar on pretty much all of their buildings. Until they found out most of their buildings couldn’t handle the weight without significant (expensive) reinforcing. Many of their installations ended up on the ground instead.
I’ve seen a few parking lots by where I live that have solar panels which make great shade. Also a mobile home park that has panels over the mobile homes to keep them cool
That’s some really expensive shade to install.
Having large parking lots at all in the first place is already Doing It Wrong, so IDGAF if there are solar panels on top of them. They’d just be one more thing to bulldoze in order to rebuild the place properly.
What we need are solar panels on the roofs of mixed-use mid-rise buildings in walkable areas.
how are you gonna sell more cars that way? petroleum doesn’t buy itself, you know
I wish, we could at least make parking lots not pitch-black. They absorb so much heat in the sun, which makes them unpleasant to walk across and of course adds to cities being overly hot in general.
Two local shops here have their parking lots out of light gray paving stones, which is so much nicer. I’m guessing, they got forced to pave, so that rain water can drain, which is of course also quite a good idea…
I believe, this is because it’s not yet a business model (nor a legal requirement). The first questions is, who even owns the lot and who has to power to make changes? Then, who gets to use the power output? Do you use it on-site or feed to grid? Do the local utility work with you or against you? (Hint: You are competitors now and running a grid is not free.)
That’s just speculation, why solar-covered parking lots are not yet build much. The idea totally makes sense. It will probably take a either a startup company that figures out how and sells the solutions to the owners or a local government pushing for more solar.
To those saying, it’s cheaper to build on a roof. Maybe, then do the roof, first, if it’s feasible. Is it cheaper to build on undeveloped land or farm land? Maybe, if you live in the middle of nowhere or drive a significant distance to do your shopping. Still, plenty of opportunity to build over parking lots.
I’ve seen other discussions come to the conclusion that rooftop solar on a warehouse size building would be more expensive than the whole infrastructure of parking lot shades. They said that the entire structure would need reinforcement. Not a problem on new buildings, they can be designed to take the extra weight from the start
A girl I dated works for a company that has a “rubble site,” they essentially tried solar on the roof, and it eventually collapsed the roof in and ruined the entire building.
Along with the points already made, selling energy back to the grid further complicates things. Selling energy as a non-utility is not allowed or practically worthless in a lot of states. So it’s really only valuable to the commercial space that can use it. Couple that with retail space like stip malls that rent their locations and there’s little incentive for the property owner to provide solar energy to the renter.
Pretty popular in Phoenix
They wouldn’t even have to sell it. Just make it available for EV charging, let customers swipe their card when they park, and top up while they shop.
I don’t know if that’s any less costly than selling the power to the grid, but it might help recoup the costs quicker.
In Central Orange County, CA solar commonly seen covering parking at schools, transit hubs and government buildings. Less common on commercial lots but there are some. As renewable generation is helpful in attaining Leed certification it will become more common everywhere solar is practical.
My grocery store has some. I don’t know if it’s actually economical for them in terms of power, but the shade for the car is nice.
It’s happened in some places. The local high school and train station parking lots where I live have them.
In addition to what has been said already, in many places the cost to upgrade the electrical service to the building to handle the amount of power that could be generated can be as much or more than all the other costs combined. So now the building operators are looking at millions in cost with a potentially 30 year payback period. It just doesn’t make sense at that point.
