LA’s little shade balls problem.

I understand that this is a problem, but…

LA’s scheme to cover a reservoir under 96 million “shade balls” may not be all it is touted to be, experts told, with some critics going so far as to refer to the plan as a “potential disaster.”


Experts differed over the best color for the tiny plastic balls, with one telling they should have been white and another saying a chrome color would be optimal. But all agreed that the worst color for the job is the one LA chose.

…I apologize in advance.

Big BallsAC/DC

God, I’m puerile today and I just can’t make myself care.

7 thoughts on “LA’s little shade balls problem.”

  1. White == mildew == not optimal. (who says L.A. doesn’t have culture?)
    Chrome == significantly more expensive. (plus heavy metals in water)
    Aluminum == less expensive than chrome, but will be stolen for the recycling center dollars.
    The fascinating part is .. L.A.’s balls are only supposed to last a couple years, long enough for a floating solar electricity project to be built out .. and the carbon black on L.A.’s balls is .. pointless.

  2. I was wondering about them increasing evaporation. Especially if the balls move around, and have a thin layer of water on their tops.

  3. White plastic disintegrates under UV radiation – i.e., when left out in the sun. Dark colors are less susceptible.

    1. That is simply not true. The pigment used for color has nothing to do with the UV stability of the plastic.

Comments are closed.