303
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Neighborhoods with more trees and green space stay cooler, while those coated with layers of asphalt swelter. Lower-income neighborhoods tend to be hottest, a city report found, and they have the least tree canopy.

The same is true in cities across the country, where poor and minority neighborhoods disproportionately suffer the consequences of rising temperatures. Research shows the temperatures in a single city, from Portland, Oregon, to Baltimore, can vary by up to 20 degrees. For a resident in a leafy suburb, a steamy summer day may feel uncomfortable. But for their friend a few neighborhoods over, it’s more than uncomfortable — it’s dangerous.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago

Build covers with solar panels on their roofs. Provide shade and generate money in the long run. Most brick-and-mortar shoppers would be more attracted to covered parking, too.

It blows my mind that an article about shade deserts doesn't mention covering with solar collection systems. We all should expect anything intended to take sunlight should be a photovoltaic surface.

[-] Toast@lemmy.film 42 points 2 years ago

An increase in the number of solar cells in an area can be useful, but shade cover from trees would have a greater cooling effect on most areas. Trees both shade and provide transpiration cooling. The water evaporating from leaves cools the surrounding air as the water goes from a liquid to gas phase.

[-] SkyeStarfall 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

And just like solar panels, trees harvest a part of the energy in sunlight, giving additional cooling to just a shade. And trees are cheaper to set up, even if they may not provide a return on electricity.

Ideally you would have trees on the ground and solar panels on the roofs, to further increase cooling.

[-] Cheers@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 years ago

I really hope Biden pushes something next term that allows promotes solar like the current ev push.

Even better, ban HoAs from banning solar. Fuck that noise.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago

Trees should be the first priority, with solar cell shade a distant second. Trees only need water and minor maintenance, are far cooler to be under than a simple shade barrier, provide a lot of benefits like wind breaking and homes for nature to live in that are better for people than artificial structures.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 years ago

Not a bad idea per se but it’s a very expensive solution. We probably won’t be able build enough panels for all of the shade we’ll need for future heat.

Trees are usually the best and easiest solution in most areas, but many municipalities including Tampa don’t take them very seriously. They need space for roots if they’re to provide adequate shade in urban areas.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago

Most brick-and-mortar shoppers

This whole article is about residential areas, not commercial / retail ones.

We all should expect anything intended to take sunlight should be a photovoltaic surface.

How do you manage that in neighborhood with preexisting homes?

[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

My wording was hasty. I only envision that new structures should be expected to come with solar tiles or panels. Like, you spent half a mil on a new house, do an extra 10-20k to have a useful roof instead of a ridiculous summer passive heater.

And yes, you're right, trees should be #1, and the main point of the article was really the disappearance of green spaces and coverage. This brief spot is what was on my mind in my take on it:

Quicker actions could include erecting better shade structures at bus stops or implementing rules for construction to encourage the use of materials that generate less heat in the sun. For example, some cities in the Northeast — including Philadelphia and New York — provide financial incentives for “green roofs,” in which the top of a building is covered with plants.

So I guess I had an "old man yells at clouds" moment.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago
[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago

To what? Homes? Sure, but who is paying for it? Otherwise what do you suggest, erecting covered parking spots over the tops of people's yards or driveways?

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You can get subsidies to add on. And after they're installed, they save on energy costs, eventually paying for themselves.

Also, yes to driveways.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Carports have been a thing since they were called something else when used by horse and buggy.

this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
303 points (100.0% liked)

News

37445 readers
1443 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS