Greta Thunberg tennis court (solar panel sunshade)

Happy National Cut Your Energy Costs Day to those who celebrate.

An idea for how to be simultaneously more virtuous and comfortable: a Greta Thunberg-branded tennis court shade. ChatGPT says that some fabric shades have already been made and they should be about 45′ high to avoid interference with lobs (50-65′ at the pro level). ChatGPT says that it would be stupid expensive to engineer this in rigid solar panels, especially if there is a need for the structure to survive a hurricane, but on the other hand we’re told that the only way to save Planet Earth from going Full Venus is to do stupid expensive stuff. Florida’s Broward County (home to FLL) has covered two basketball courts with solar:

They say that what was, very likely, an eye-watering outlay of tax dollars is “a visible reminder of how sustainable infrastructure investments can benefit both people and the planet while saving on energy costs.” (If there truly were net savings on energy costs wouldn’t we see these all over Florida, Arizona, Nevada, etc., and not just in this one park?)

If there is a big influx of tax base thanks to Zohran Mamdani, I’d love to see more of this in Palm Beach County. ChatGPT says that it could conceivably work for pickleball (required height only 18-22′).

Separately, some folks are working on tennis coach robots, e.g., ACEMATE and Tenniix:

ChatGPT’s explanation of why a tennis Greta Thunberg-brand shade can’t be affordably engineering to Miami-Dade hurricane standards:

Why it’s hard (and what makes it “expensive hard”)

1) Wind uplift loads get huge, and PV is a rigid “wing”

ASCE 7 treats canopies/roofs with net uplift pressure coefficients (negative pressures trying to peel the roof off). Canopies got more explicit treatment in ASCE 7-16 and later. Structure Magazine+1

For a big, flat-ish PV canopy:

• Uplift (psf) scales roughly with $V^2$V2.
• Going from 120 mph to 170 mph isn’t “+40%”—it’s closer to (170/120)² ≈ 2.0× the pressure.

Fabric shades can “spill” wind; PV cannot. The PV roof transfers that uplift straight into:

• purlins/joists
• primary girders
• columns
• foundations (uplift + overturning)

2) Height required for tennis multiplies overturning

Tennis-friendly clearance is typically ~40–50+ ft so you don’t ruin lobs/serve sightlines. That height makes the wind problem worse because:

• the structure “lever arm” increases → bigger overturning moments
• columns behave like tall masts, not “carport posts”

A PV canopy that might be straightforward at 12–16 ft (parking) becomes much heavier at 45–55 ft.