
Covering parking lots with solar panels - zonotope
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/28/the-best-idea-in-a-long-time-covering-parking-lots-with-solar-panels/?foo=bar
======
fernly
Ever since I first saw one of these -- several years ago, near the Googleplex
[1] -- I have had this idea for a real-estate venture. You're welcome to take
it on, because I'll never get around to it. Step 1, go into AZ, somewhere not
too far from Phoenix or Tucson, buy some cheap desert land near a freeway
exit. Step 2, grade the land and gravel it, never mind asphalt, no need. Step
3, good high security fence around. Step 4, Put up solar panels like these,
but raised good and high, 20ft clearance under. Step 5, advertise "Shaded RV
Storage". Charge people a good rate for storing their RVs where they will not
be so horribly sun-damaged, as many RVs are damaged by long-term sun exposure.
Meanwhile selling power to the utility. And, bonus, put gutters along the
lower edge of the tilted panels, leading to a buried cistern, collect
rainwater water for pretty landscaping and for washing RVs (for a fee, your RV
will be all sparkly clean when you come pick it up).

Yer welcome.

[1] Street view [https://goo.gl/maps/2T8mZ](https://goo.gl/maps/2T8mZ)

~~~
kenrikm
Feasible?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOZBrHqTJk4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOZBrHqTJk4)

~~~
tracker1
In the gp's post, he's talking about above ground mounting, similar to
rooftop, and more like the parking lot coverage in tfa... in this case it's
actually about a break even for the solar in 8-12 years usually... (feel good
qualities not withstanding)... that covers the electrical usage for the lot's
residents, at the very least. Assuming you are charging for the electricity...
you are still making the lot rent, and on top of that, you can charge more for
being a "green" lot (if the organic food market is any indication), which
means you can charge over 20-30% more than standard lots... so your break even
on investment is about 8-12 years, but you'll be making 20-30% more on the lot
rent, which means you'll probably break even much sooner, and see a close to
pure profit for 8-10 years after the investment paid for itself.

It's not a bad system... this also doesn't account for states like Arizona and
California that offer tax breaks and incentives for solar initiatives like
this one.

------
jmadsen
Here in Japan, virtually ALL parking in lots is hourly metered. You get a
ticket & if you spend money in the stores, they will credit you the price of
the parking (making it cheap or free for actual paying customers) on the
ticket. This is actually done for reasons of space - cities are crowded & and
space for parking is at a premium. The result is that it is just considered
normal.

In the US, they have these massive lots that are spread out over an area often
larger than the store itself. The obvious thing to do would charge for parking
with the Japanese system, and use the proceeds to help offset the initial
costs, just like with a toll highway or bridge.

However, the "God-given Right to Free Parking" mentality would never allow it
to work, and the local governments are too weak to try to impose it. Every
city has a ring of malls outside of it not just for cheaper land, but to
escape any form of regulations from the city itself. This is a "risky thing",
and businesses don't like risk.

It would take a very careful marketing campaign to be able to kickstart
something like this. I doubt many places have the leadership required.

~~~
ams6110
The lots are privately owned by the malls, shopping centers, or stores. The
"city" is in no position to impose paid parking on private property. Where
parking is scarce, private parking is generally not free. Where parking is
provided on public property (e.g. city streets) it is often metered, though
certainly not always.

~~~
jmadsen
While they can't directly tell a mall "you have to charge", they can encourage
it indirectly through zoning laws:

For example, they can cap the footprint of parking lot space, leading to
stores building parking garages or taking their own steps to minimize
freeloaders through metering. That's just an off the top of my head example.

Never say the govt "can't do something". The have power of eminent domain, as
an example of how far they are able to go when the actual will is there to
have something they want. Check out the history of the new Fenway Park for
things they can do.

~~~
crisnoble
Rather than a cap, many suburbs have a minimum parking space requirement for
stores. Suburbs have been using zoning laws to encourage a car based economy.
In the Chicago suburb which I used to live, you could not walk the one mile to
Target even if you wanted to for lack of sidewalks, crosswalks, etc.

------
mixedmath
I'm not too aware of payback timeframes and maintenance costs of solar power.
So I thought I would look into the Rutgers solar canopy. This led me to the
news article at Rutgers discussing the project:

[http://news.rutgers.edu/news-releases/2011/04/rutgers-
board-...](http://news.rutgers.edu/news-releases/2011/04/rutgers-board-of-
gov-20110405#.VMv_7VWJOuY)

The description largely matches this article in the Washington Post. It also
mentions that it was a "40.8 million dollar project." I'm uncertain if this
includes various tax breaks and incentives, but let's take it at face value.

It also mentions that it will generate 1.2 million dollars per year in
electricity. If we assume that electricity costs will stay perfectly constant
and that maintenance costs are factored into the 40.8 million, this means the
facility would pay for itself in 34 years.

I do not actually expect maintenance to be included. I ask myself, how long
does a solar panel actually last? It seems many tariffs and incentives are
based on a 25 year life of a solar panel. The UK Centre for Alternative
Technology has the following article:
[http://info.cat.org.uk/questions/pv/life-expectancy-solar-
PV...](http://info.cat.org.uk/questions/pv/life-expectancy-solar-PV-panels)

In it, they explain that a solar panel's output will go down by about 1% per
year. The materials surrounding the electricity production will wear, yellow,
or otherwise decay, but the power production seems largely unaffected for 30
or more years (aside from the 1% decrease each year, that is).

On the flipside, energy costs are rising at much more than 1% a year. So in
terms of raw energy pricing, and assuming that maintenance isn't too much of
an issue, it seems like the Rutgers facility might "pay for itself" in 35
years. Of course, it isn't exactly a good fiscal decision to freeze $40
million dollars for 40 years.

I have no idea how to quantify the benefits of shade for the cars. But overall
I now have a basic understanding of why someone might build the Rutgers
facility.

It also seems likely that as energy costs rise, solar panels become less
expensive and more efficient, then these canopies will make much more
financial sense. It seems like it would take a lot for it to be a "good money
investment" though.

~~~
pstrateman
"On the flipside, energy costs are rising at much more than 1% a year."

[http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/natural-
gas.aspx?timeframe=10y](http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/natural-
gas.aspx?timeframe=10y)

huh?

~~~
digikata
Perhaps electric rates would be more relevant than natural gas...

[http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/7?geo=g&...](http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/7?geo=g&agg=0,1&endsec=vg)

------
rottyguy
I was in Qatar this summer and noticed them. Anyone know how long this has
been installed there?

[http://www.qf.org.qa/content/the-
foundation/issue-68/qatars-...](http://www.qf.org.qa/content/the-
foundation/issue-68/qatars-new-energy-horizons)

QF’s solar project has also brought parking lot shades covered in solar panels
to Education City – the first in Qatar – and achieved the first agreement to
be signed by Qatar General Electricity and Water Corporation (KAHRAMAA) that
accepts a private commercial energy project’s connection to Qatar’s central
power grid.

looks like the following company has been providing this type of construction
since, at least, 2012 when this article was published (the company looks like
it's been around since 2006).

[http://envisionsolar.com/press-releases/envision-solar-
annou...](http://envisionsolar.com/press-releases/envision-solar-announces-
business-development-initiatives-in-united-arab-emirates-qatar-and-spain/)

------
forgotAgain
Our local government has leased the rights to build solar panels over their
parking lots to a private sector company. They've covered most lots at this
time.

The panels have all of the advantages outlined in the article.

The only downside not mentioned was snow and ice falling from the overhead
panels. At least one person has been hurt.

------
therealdrag0
Putting solar panels in the road/parking-lot = bad idea. But putting them over
seems like a good idea from my limited knowledge.

~~~
reitzensteinm
Yeah, the problem with the hype for solar roadways is that this alternative
exists. Even if it were a good idea (which it isn't), this would beat it every
time in terms of maintenance, energy efficiency and cost. And frankly
additional benefits, shade is better than LEDs.

So even if the economics works, and it doesn't, it wouldn't make sense to
start with solar roadways until the carparks are all done like this, and
that's a long long way away.

~~~
transfire
You are not factoring in the added savings on asphalt. Asphalt roads are
expensive. For example, the new I-4 expansion in Orlando will cost $2.3
billion for 21 miles of 4 added lanes. The reason solar roadways make
economical sense is because it replaces the road itself and thus adsorbs the
cost of the asphalt that would otherwise have to be used. Solar canopies only
make sense for parking lots and only in hot regions.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
But aren't solar panels _vastly_ more expensive than mere asphalt, per unit of
area?

~~~
raisedbyninjas
Why yes they are. You need more than just solar panels though. You'll need
thick tempered glass, power inverters, monitoring and management systems,
transformers and high voltage power lines. Once installed, your glass blocks
will provide the ride comfort, noise, safety, of brick or cobblestone roads
but less durable and more slippery.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
I seem to remember that cobblestone roads were almost as slippery as ice
whenever it rained. I grew up in a town that actually had cobblestone streets
(long story, Europe).

------
dba7dba
This seems to be a much better option than setting up large solar farms in the
middle of the CA desert. Parking lots are eyesores anyway so cover them up
with solar panels. Why ruin pristine nature with solar panels.

~~~
thrownaway2424
The difference is the deserts get serious insolation. Or put another way, the
places with major sunshine do not also contain major cities. Another problem
with cities is the structures shade the panels.

~~~
tracker1
Depends on the cities... here in the Phoenix area most of the buildings are
only 1-2 stories.. and most of the larger parking lots don't get any shade
from the buildings... There are several of these covered lots here in Phoenix,
and more going up. A lot of places have covered parking anyway, so throwing
solar panels on them isn't that much more cost in labor, and payoff in 8-12
years usually, with some profites for 5-15 after (at least from the costs of
the past decade as a forcast).

------
freehunter
A major Midwest software company near me has these over their visitor lot
(their employee lot being underground), and has a huge farm of solar panels
behind the building. I think it's a great idea.

On the graph at the bottom, does anyone know why the estimation goes down
after 2016, then only slightly rises in 2018? There has to be some reason why
solar installs would take a major hit like that, but I didn't see it explained
in the article.

~~~
maxerickson
The source of the chart data is linked just above it.

 _GTM Research forecasts that the market will continue to grow year-over-year
until the drop-off in the federal ITC, peaking at 318 megawatts in 2016_

The federal ITC is a tax credit.

------
the8472
> Asphalt and concrete absorb the sun’s energy, retaining heat — and
> contributing to the “urban heat island effect,” in which cities are hotter
> than the surrounding areas.

If the solar cells were coated with some layer that reflects all the photons
that can't be harvested for electricity that might mitigate that problem even
further

Or maybe they already are?

~~~
baq
most are black because that's what absorbs photons. asphalt happens to be
black, but it converts 100% of captured energy into heat, whereas PV systems
decrease that value to 95-50% (source:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_efficiency#mediaview...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_efficiency#mediaviewer/File:PVeff\(rev141208\).jpg))

~~~
the8472
They're black in visible light. But as far as I know they cannot harvest IR
photons. So it would probably be useful if they reflected IR.

Although I don't know if it's better for them to be reflective or black in the
IR window where where atmosphere is transparent. Black makes for good emitters
too and that way they could shed heat into space.

If we could arbitrarily designed reflectivity vs. transparency it would
probably be transparent in visible, reflective in IR, black in the IR window

------
uptown
Despite all the positives - not everybody is a fan of these. This is a battle
being waged in Connecticut over solar carports:

[http://www.fairfieldcitizenonline.com/news/article/Neighbors...](http://www.fairfieldcitizenonline.com/news/article/Neighbors-
lawsuit-aims-to-pull-the-plug-on-6029470.php)

~~~
kalleboo
That sounds more like someone is sour over their own zoning permit being
denied than any actual opposition to the panels themselves.

~~~
maxerickson
I think the panels might block the road visibility of his business (which I
don't have a lot of sympathy for, but it's at least a less petty motivation).

------
stretchwithme
I sure hope such investments have enough time to make their money back. I
expect robotic cars to do away with the need to own personal cars. Shared by
many people, a robotic cab will spend a lot less time sitting around and many
parking lots will disappear.

------
lifeisstillgood
This strikes me as the perfect political investment. It passes the "new one on
me" test, and it passes the "green is hip" test, and it would be a constant
reminder of the politicians involved (ala Boris Bikes for Londoners).

It also promises to kick start a maintenance industry and lower costs as
stnadrds are formed.

Overall I would expect this one to be subsidised and persued more hungrily
than any offshore projects or windfarms

~~~
dogwelder
In Europe and Asia, I'd expect so. In the States, fossil fuel interests have
already mobilized their media campaign, pushing for new taxes to penalize
local solar energy generation. They've had some victories and some losses, but
as another poster mentioned, they don't have to win every battle - just enough
to sow uncertainty on whether it'll be a good investment.

------
phamilton
Our local high school (bay area) has solar panels over the parking lot. Seems
to be working out.

------
_almosnow
This is nice but this is also 99.99% of solar related energy "solutions".

If we put <some solar tech> in <some place> we could generate enough energy to
power <many things>; however it is still not cost-effective to do so.

~~~
_almosnow
Yeah right... this is not true at all.

