Welcome to Thunderdome

All that suggests is that some plants prefer semi-shade for best growing conditions.

WHich is a huge "duh."

You're a bit too negative on anything posted here.

There's far more to the article than "certain plants like shade". They're growing plants in new areas, using the panels to make that place more hospitable to plants, using less water, getting more fruit, absorbing more CO2, etc.

Well come on... when was agriculture invented, 8,000 years ago? This "new information" is at least that old. The only twist is that someone said "use solar panels for shade."

They're addressing one of the biggest complaints about solar panels: space.

People complain that they take up too much space and there's dead space around them. Thus, the point of what they're doing here, and why they're tracking growing plants in unfamiliar areas and how much production they get out of them.

More good intentions for Gordon to shit on...

The Great Green Wall

Impossible task, and doesn't fix the problems that they claim are going to render the planet unlivable for humanity.

Leisher wrote: You're a bit too negative on anything posted here.

There's far more to the article than "certain plants like shade". They're growing plants in new areas, using the panels to make that place more hospitable to plants, using less water, getting more fruit, absorbing more CO2, etc.

A good notion. I hope they are bringing in actual farmers of the crops in question to help them address practical issues that might arise. The one that jumps out at me right off is the need for crop rotation.

Leisher wrote: More good intentions for Gordon to shit on...

The Great Green Wall

More than anywhere else on Earth, the Sahel is on the frontline of climate change and millions of locals are already facing its devastating impact. Persistent droughts, lack of food, conflicts over dwindling natural resources, and mass migration to Europe are just some of the many consequences.

So most of the issues facing the Sahel arise from them being in the desert. With the exception of mass migration to Europe, which would suggest someone there got a hold of an old Sam Kineson show.

I saw that exact map yesterday, except the USA was 2 or 3X, not 1X.

I saw that exact map yesterday, except the USA was 2 or 3X, not 1X.

One of our sources is full of shit. This one came from reddit.

Also, as a commentor there points out Europe is sitting there without much CO2 put out, but they also manufacture all their stuff in the countries putting out lots of CO2, so the map shouldn't be considered an accurate representation of who is doing all the polluting.

CA is considering the toughest plastic pollution laws.

Three bills before the state Legislature would require companies that sell products widely found in grocery stores and fast-food restaurants to shoulder much of the burden for cutting the amount of plastic waste.

Serious question: How is that any different from "We're going to build a wall and Mexico's going to pay for it"?

Do CA lawmakers actually think these corporations are going to pay this out of their profits? Do Californians understand that the companies are just going to pass those costs onto consumers?

That's not saying I disagree with trying to rid the world of plastic pollution, but I do disagree with the "sell".

GORDON wrote: I saw that exact map yesterday, except the USA was 2 or 3X, not 1X.

You did not see the exact same map. You saw a similar map measuring something different. Probably this one

One is related to population, the other to GDP. US has a lot of GDP, and does it efficiently in terms of global emissions, relative to other countries.

Ahhh yes. They were different data, just the same style.

GORDON wrote: Ahhh yes. They were different data, just the same style.

Made by the same person.

Fine, California will ban the sale of plastics in California. But are they still selling them by the cargo container full to the countries who are putting those plastics into the ocean?

GORDON wrote: Fine, California will ban the sale of plastics in California. But are they still selling them by the cargo container full to the countries who are putting those plastics into the ocean?

I think the point is to eliminate plastic usage in CA based companies completely, AND to block companies outside of CA from importing plastic products into CA. If CA gets this done, other states will follow, which means companies will have to make permanent changes for their entire product line or face the more expensive solution of having two different packaging/manufacturing options.