The top image makes me want to cry. Every new solar farm I've seen IRL or in the media has been built directly on the ground, just wasting that space.

Why is what is in this image, or other such systems, not being done everywhere?

Like at our local IKEA parking area. Why did they empty a bunch of land next to the parking lot and build them there, instead of ontop of the carpark? Thus protecting the cars from the elements at the same time as taking literally 0 space.

As shitty as the average driver is, I see a lot more car accidents in a parking lot than I see car accidents in some random field.

When you put the panels where cars are supposed to be, you have to put them up higher, this requires more material for the structure. Because the structure is now much taller, you need more material to keep it rigid. You'll also have a bigger profile compared to the wind, so you guessed it, more material is needed to make it stronger. Oh, and if a panel falls on someone's car and damages it, or injured a person waking underneath, you'll get sued, so you need a wider safety margin, which means a stronger structure, which means more material is needed.

When it rains on those panels, they create a concentrated line of water falling from a pretty good height. This will increase erosion of the parking lot, which means you need to do more frequent repairs to the surface, or you need to use more material to create gutters and channels to safely move that water away. If you go that route then you need to clean and maintain those gutters.

You're also going to have a large energized transmission network running over an area with extremely high foot and vehicle traffic - The low electrocution risk could absolutely be mitigated (unless there's damage, which is an inevitability for any equipment installed in a parking lot) but that's not going to be a problem because the entire electrical system is going to be ripped out by a junkie before there's a chance for anyone to get hurt...

Then there's also the additional complexity required to clean elevated panels like that, the difficulty in maintenance, complication to firefighting, the list of logistical issues goes on.

There's a middle ground though, which is to simply dedicate the lowest utilization portion of large parking lots to instead house standard ground solar installations. This is being done successfully in many places, as parking lot utilization is down across pretty much every commercial category post-covid so it's an easy decision to make (especially in locations like dying malls) and commercial buildings often have very robust grid infrastructure already and underground utility conduits (for things like the lights in parking lots). They're about the ugliest way to site a solar facility, but so much better than a parking lot...

Arguing the other side for both you and the user above:

As shitty as the average driver is, I see a lot more car accidents in a parking lot than I see car accidents in some random field.

People hit the street lamps in parking lots, too. We mitigated this by using a concrete base that goes up a few feet. They can hit it but the lamps are still fine.

When you put the panels where cars are supposed to be, you have to put them up higher, this requires more material for the structure. Because the structure is now much taller, you need more material to keep it rigid.

That's true but solar panels aren't that heavy.

You'll also have a bigger profile compared to the wind, so you guessed it, more material is needed to make it stronger.

Wind isn't really that much of an issue due to the profile of the panels.

Oh, and if a panel falls on someone's car and damages it, or injured a person waking underneath, you'll get sued, so you need a wider safety margin, which means a stronger structure, which means more material is needed.

You can say that about almost anything. Have you not wondered how they can build large stores and warehouses so quickly? Solar panels are much lighter than their roofs.

When it rains on those panels, they create a concentrated line of water falling from a pretty good height. This will increase erosion of the parking lot, which means you need to do more frequent repairs to the surface, or you need to use more material to create gutters and channels to safely move that water away. If you go that route then you need to clean and maintain those gutters

Gutters and channels are rather cheap, especially compared to pretty much everything else in the project or even the cost of the parking lot. You can also save a bit of money by just angling the panels a bit and including a small space between them.

You're also going to have a large energized transmission network running over an area with extremely high foot and vehicle traffic

Solar panels are low voltage, around 40v. Electrocution risk is lower than with the street lamps.

that's not going to be a problem because the entire electrical system is going to be ripped out by a junkie before there's a chance for anyone to get hurt...

What's stopping them now? There's lots of copper in the street lamps and various equipment at a store. The answer is that the copper isn't easy to access. It would take someone way too much time to get any substantial amount of copper from the wires so long as the run back is protected. They would need to rip apart each panel to get to it.

Then there's also the additional complexity required to clean elevated panels like that, the difficulty in maintenance, complication to firefighting, the list of logistical issues goes on.

Not really - you just need a ladder.

People hit the street lamps in parking lots, too. We mitigated this by using a concrete base that goes up a few feet. They can hit it but the lamps are still fine.

Sure, but now you're increasing the expense significantly. With an equal amount of money (the real limiing factor), all these extra concrete bases means fewer solar panels deployed.

That’s true but solar panels aren’t that heavy.

That doesn't remove the cost and complexity of building the rigid structure. So again, if the overhead structure is needed, even few panels deployed for equal money.

Wind isn’t really that much of an issue due to the profile of the panels.

What?! The low profile makes it even worse for wind. They act as sail area catching the wind and pulling against their mounts.

You can say that about almost anything.

You can't say that about ground mount solar, which is the better alternative many times.

Solar panels are low voltage, around 40v. Electrocution risk is lower than with the street lamps.

A single solar panel may be 40v, but in commercial deployments like a parking lot, panels would be linked together electrically called "strings" and strings of solar panels regularly reach over 400v in residential installations. In commercial deployments strings are regularly carrying 600v to 1500v. This serious voltage just a couple of meters above people and cars.

What’s stopping them now?

The ground mount panels are in a separate place where people shouldn't be. If someone is there that is not a worker, then its pretty clearly it could be a thief. That wouldn't be the case of parking lot installations where regular people walking around the equipment would be a regular activity.

Not really - you just need a ladder.

I'm guessing you may not have a lot of experience with using a ladder in the workplace. There are all kinds of safety regulations in place to prevent workers from injury. This also means usually not carrying large/heavy items up the ladder and instead using a powered scissor lift. So not only would there be this extra equipment requirement to maintaining the parking lot solar cover, but you'd have to work around the cars and pedestrians using the parking lot too. All of this increases expense, which leads to fewer panels deployed for equal money. None of those things would be needed on ground mount solar in a separate field.

The only time that parking covered solar would make sense is if you're already space constrained or if you have a separate requirement to cover the parking lot already.