while this is completely true in a lot of places, i also have never heard of this specific technology, which could help the ever increasing heat problem elsewhere if used in combination with sane urban planning, especially other improvements in regards to heat.
At a stated $330,000 per mile, there are almost assuredly better measures than this dollar for dollar in most places. This makes sense in a city as comically car-dependent as Dallas and in such a hot climate, but realistically, that $330,000 could be better spent elsewhere toward fighting temperatures if a city actually wanted to do something about city temperatures and global warming as a whole.
It’s just that those things would involve actually improving the city to the detriment of NIMBY drivers.
while this is completely true in a lot of places, i also have never heard of this specific technology, which could help the ever increasing heat problem elsewhere if used in combination with sane urban planning, especially other improvements in regards to heat.
At a stated $330,000 per mile, there are almost assuredly better measures than this dollar for dollar in most places. This makes sense in a city as comically car-dependent as Dallas and in such a hot climate, but realistically, that $330,000 could be better spent elsewhere toward fighting temperatures if a city actually wanted to do something about city temperatures and global warming as a whole.
It’s just that those things would involve actually improving the city to the detriment of NIMBY drivers.
Heck, even green spaces lower overall temperatures.