[Aurornis]

Or don’t put the panels near a railway at all. We have so much land and even empty rooftops that would be easier and safer to use first. Running panels along a railway means the electricity has to be carried all the way back to some point, meaning either giant cables to handle the current or specialized equipment and high voltage transmission lines. None of that was addressed by this pilot program that was 100 meters long.

You can do a pilot test of solar panels anywhere and call it a success, but the real test is scaling it up in an economically viable way compared to alternatives. None of that was tested.

Putting panels in a line is the worst arrangement. Just put them on roof tops or fields and keep it to places where they don’t have to be armored and reinforced.

[lefra]

Conveniently, there's already an electric cable sized to transport a few MW nearby. This might reduce the cost of installation, also there'll be no land acquisition/impact study issues.

However, I agree that putting solar panels in between or near rails will increase the cost of maintenance: the technicians will need to travel longer times to the work site, and now they also need to be certified to work near railroads.

[matthewdgreen]

What specs do you require for long-distance train electrification vs. the specs you need for electrical delivery to the grid?

[bamboozled]

Car parks, imagine if every car park and shopping center roof top was covered in panels..., literally fields of panels.

[1718627440]

> Running panels along a railway means the electricity has to be carried all the way back to some point, meaning either giant cables to handle the current or specialized equipment and high voltage transmission lines.

You aware, what always runs right next to a railway right? I mean the capacity might be already saturated for the driving current, but cables next to the railway won't be a new thing.

[dzhiurgis]

> empty rooftops

That's just inefficient use of labour. I wish government used grants (or loans really) for solar farms instead. Batteries maybe, but even then it would be likely more efficient to install them on a substation level than every home.

[KptMarchewa]

> solar farms

That's just inefficient use of land.

On the battery point I agree.

[Tostino]

Want to take a stroll on Google maps with me and see all the unused or underused land in the US? People don't actually take up all that much space.

I just did a cross country drive a few days ago. We are not constrained on land.

[KptMarchewa]

US is not the whole world. Sure, if you have deserts, use them. Poland does not.

[vitally3643]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Population_density_o...

Or are you talking about a different Poland?

People don't take up that much space and there is a strong tendency for populations to collapse into concentrated cities. In general, across the entire human species. All cultures and countries behave this way.

I think you've got plenty of free land.

[KptMarchewa]

Can you take a look at actual satellite map and tell me where all the unused land you apparently see is?

Pretty much all of the land in Poland is used - either for agriculture, forests or human settlements.