• empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Not really. Lots of grasses thrive in partial/full shade, the shade reduces water loss so there is less plant stress and less irrigation is needed during peak summer heat, and also there are now solar panels available with transparent glass backings that allow 5-10% of the sunlight to still reach the ground below improving growth.

      Cohabitating solar panels and grazing animals is like, almost perfect optimal land use.

  • compostgoblin@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    They tried to do this at my workplace, and the union filed a grievance that work was being taken from the landscapers. The union won, so no sheep for us.

  • moonlight@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Or the panels could be on existing structures instead of taking up addional space, and we could get our fibers and food from plant sources instead of exploiting animals.

    Although this is infinitely better than coal and factory farms.

    • 4am@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      All that needs to be done here is to make the panels a little taller. Others have already pointed out how partial shade is beneficial to some crops and grass, and reduce water usage. Gazing livestock means no landscaping crews/pollution. This is actually close to ideal in many circumstances.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The grassy field was there before the panels. It’s overall utility as a grazing field is not reduced by more than a few percent (if panels are built better than in the photo). Structures should definitely always have panels on them but this isn’t that bad.