[cassepipe]

No. If the solution is to price in the externalities, it only makes sense for Walmart to pay for it. Their parking means less land with vegetation that can capture carbon and all the bad externalities that comes with land artificialization. Plus, they will probably benefit from it because else what are peope going to do when they come back in a car that unbearably hot (and extreme heat events, and extreme cold events for that matter, are going to more more frequent ) ? Leave the engine on for condtionned ? That would be crazy.

[ncmncm]

My local Walmart has solar over much of its parking lot. All the cars huddle under it.

Meanwhile, the store roof entirely lacks solar.

Nearby Safeway is opposite.

[galaxyLogic]

Good starts. Must start somewhere. We all want an electric car and a lack of charging stations is a problem. Therefore I would vote for starting with parking lots, they are closer to cars.

[ncmncm]

Big-box store roofs are much cheaper to install on than building elevated racks in parking lots. Electric power is easily delivered where it is most useful via wires. So, for cost-effectiveness, the first place to put solar is on those big flat roofs. But customers do like covered parking lots.

[Schroedingersat]

> No. If the solution is to price in the externalities...

I mean I'd love pricing in the externalities, but then it'd be moot because there'd be a building rather than a parking lot, no walmart, and a train or bicycle rather than a car. There'd also be plenty of roof area for solar panels in any place with a density lower than tokyo metropolis so you wouldn't even need to build supports.

[galaxyLogic]

It's not only companies providing parking lots for their customers. In big cities it is big business to provide parking for whoever needs it. Railroads need parking lots for their customers who drive to the station with their cars and park them there.