Solar energy's darker side stirs concern

[Javaman]

(just to note, I'm a big supporter of solar, but I also am aware of the energy used, waste produced and the environmental fallout that is a result from their manufucture, that said...)

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-notsogreen14-2009jan14,0,3000901.story

Everybody loves solar, the shiny superstar of renewable energy.

But scratch the surface of the manufacturing process and the green sheen disappears. Vast amounts of fossil fuels are used to produce and transport panels. Solar cells contain toxic materials. Some components can't be easily recycled.

That has some environmentalists worried about a new tidal wave of hazardous waste headed for the nation's landfills when panels eventually wear out. A report to be released today by the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition warns that the industry and lawmakers need to set policies now to ensure that a clean technology doesn't leave a dirty legacy.

"You can't just call your product green and close your eyes to what's happening in the supply chain," said Sheila Davis, executive director of the San Jose nonprofit group that pushes for green practices in the technology sector.

"The solar energy industry is running into some of the same problems . . . we've seen in the electronics industry," whose waste is polluting U.S. landfills and contaminating groundwater with harmful substances such as mercury and chromium, Davis said.

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. If I went back to college and wanted to learn how to research non-toxic solar panel tech...

What courses should I focus on? Physics and chemistry?

[Javaman]

3. Probably chemistry. Just my opinion. nt

[kestrel91316]

21. P chem? That's physical chemistry. The class that made most people

at my school run screaming from rather than take.

Oh, electrical engineering, yoo.

Tough stuff. Not for intellectual lightweights.

[NNadir]

41. Why not just take classes in theology?

There is no such thing as a non-toxic solar cell.

[MADem]

2. Put a deposit on 'em, that's refunded when you turn 'em in--like bottles and cans.

Make it easy to recycle.

I love the Doom and Gloom way the media approaches everything. Everyone, Be Very Afraid!!! Solar Panels are BAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!!!!!!

Hell, reuse and remanufacture the stuff. It's got potential as a market sector.

[Javaman]

5. I think you are on target...

what I see as part of the alternative energy movement is a cradle to cradle push for all things manufactured.

as oil runs out, commodities will once again jump in value. So the benefit upon society and the economy will once again come center stage.

and because our society will be one of leaner means when it comes to natural resources, recycling will become natural a part of how we doing things much like anything else.

we are almost there. the jump in oil prices last year showed that people are willing if not out right eager to contribute to a better cleaner society. It's just sad that it took a major hit to their wallets to motivate them.

the world changes. :)

[DCKit]

12. A paid advertisement courtesy of Big Energy.

Laws and enforcement to regulate pollution and recycling make this argument moot. Additionally, thin film manufacture is getting cleaner, cheaper and is less energy intensive.

Pure propaganda.

Where can I get a writing gig like this?

[Javaman]

15. That is all true, but currently large scale thin solar is still a little bit off.

and silicon based panels are still the current trend.

Like I said, I'm a big proponent of solar, but as it gets larger in it's use, and even though there are EPA regs regarding it's manufacture, I still believe these issues still need to be talked about.

we have other forms of energy that are regulated by the EPA, but it certainly doesn't mean that these other energy producers follow the regs tooth and nail.

Solar will become big, but like with any industry, there should be watchdog groups that make sure the manufacturers toe the line.

[kristopher]

18. A bit off? I don't think so.

Or at least no further off than the time it takes to build the machines - the technology is here.
http://www.nanosolar.com/

[Javaman]

20. I'm talking about mainstream use.

I know about nanosolar and I truly hope that with the new administration, companies such as them will get a massive infusion of capital to expand, but at current levels, since I can't predict the future, it still is a bit off.

So as a result, the current "norm" is still silicon based.

I work in the architecture industry and I know from first hand what materials are currently being pushed by the industry. Sadly, the bottom line, regardless of long term savings, is the upfront cost. That's the reality, doesn't mean it's right.

[kristopher]

23. How long did it take for home computers to go mainstream?

How long did it take flat panel monitors and LCD TVs to go mainstream?

The bottom line isn't upfront costs, it is projected demand that drives investment in manufacturing capacity. Thin film manufacturing capacity is dirt cheap and lightning fast to bring online. And as for demand - just look at the renewable portfolio standards that are being developed; ex California just declared a 33% goal by 2020.

Maybe it is just a matter of differing definitions of "a bit off". It's a rather vague term, after all.

[Javaman]

25. Well, I only know of what I speak.

Right now, all our clients are cutting back or putting projects on hold. They few that aren't are asking for cheaper materials to save on overhead construction costs. That's the reality.

and contrary to your opinion, because I usually respect it, upfront costs are always the bottom line in the construction/architectural industry.

Recently there was a pretty controversial article regarding the LEED certification for buildings that wanted to go "green", a study that was pointed out in the article highlighted the fact that although owners want to go green they will only go with the minimum required because the cost to really go green would blow their budgets.

I really value your insights, but this is what is actually happening on the ground. I work with this every single day.

And like I said, yes, I am aware of the dirt cheapness of thin film, but its still not in wide spread use. And until it has a verifiable record of use, it will be a while off before it's used in mainstream.

Look, I never ever said, I agreed with this and I certainly don't set the regulations nor the trends, but it's just what is currently going on.

This is why I am really hopeful that with the new admin, more R&D money will be pumped into thin film and it will go into wide use and mainstream.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just stating what is happening right now.

[DCKit]

22. Re: The EPA regulations...

There has been no enforcement of laws or regulations in the past eight years - The EPA is currently toothless in regards to Big Business (and people I know who work at the EPA are looking foreward to getting back to work under the Obama Administration).

We have the technology and the laws. Under Obama, we need enforcement and harsh penalties for those who would pollute to save a few bucks/unit.

If capturing poisons created during manufacture costs a few dollars per panel (or circuit board), passing those costs along to the consumer would go unnoticed. The age of unbridled corporate greed needs to end immediately.

[Javaman]

26. Totally and completely agree.

hopefully the new admin will right the screwed up course that this nation has been on for the last 8 years.

more teeth into the EPA, less oil lobbying money. :)

[Eric J in MN]

4. "fossil fuels are used to produce and transport panels"

Fossil fuels are also used to produce and transport materials in nuclear power plants.

And cartons of ice cream.

[Javaman]

7. Everything runs on oil, we all know that, but...

I think their point is: many people out there think solar panels are "clean", meaning fossil fuels aren't used in their manufacture.

there was a troll tool on here two days ago, laughing at people who drive their cars while he takes the bus. it's that backward mentality that is still very evident in society regarding what is perceived as a clean source of energy and what is not. That troll was tombstoned but not before I got my snarky remark in about him thinking his bus ran on magic dust. LOL

People still need to be educated.

[HamdenRice]

14. The point this seems to be missing is dynamic feedback

Of course, right now, everything manufactured and transported, including solar technology, that uses energy is using fossil fuel energy. But as more and more solar generating capacity is created including solar panel generation, then those very same manufactured items become cleaner in their manufacture and transportation.

It's terribly unrealistic to expect a new solar energy generating technology would itself be created without fossil fuel. The question is whether over time there is a dynamic feedback of ever more energy produced by solar which makes the production of the same items less polluting.

[Javaman]

17. very good point, but...

Like I have posted in other threads, the issue for me, isn't the fact that yes, over time, solar will basically pay for itself via self producing energy for it's manufacture, it's (and here is where I go off on a tangent) the smelting of metals and the lubricants that need to be developed if we are indeed to have an industry that basically powers itself.

I completely agree with what you are saying but power in the form of running the machines isn't enough. Those machines will break down and also need to run smoothly.

to me, the two largest hurdles faced by industry today, isn't the need of energy, but how to manufacture new parts and keep them well maintained.

[conscious evolution]

37. keep them well maintained.

Sorry.I gotta laugh my ass off at that statement.At least as when applied to solar panels.
As someone who maintains a solar system the only maintanence our panels have needed is an occasional cleaning.Even most of the rest of the system seldom needs repair work.(Our charge controller is too new to judge yet.)The only component we have ever had to replace was a fourteen year old mechanical timer switch that wore out.
Over 15 years old,our panels are producing more power than they are rated for.Rated for an output of 85 watts at 17.5 vdc they are actually producing around 105 watts at 21 vdc.Not to shabby,eh?

For me the biggest hurdle is getting th cost down so that more people can afford them.


When it comes to other means of generating power maintainance is going to be a problem.I hope designers and manufacturers take this into account.Most people have trouble maintaining a car or home much less something as seemingly complicated as generation system.

[Javaman]

38. sigh, I'm not talking about solar panels, I'm talking about general industry

or even the machines that construct the panels.

good lord.

[conscious evolution]

39. I know that.

But "Maintain solar panels?Bwahahahaha" was the first thought that jumped into my head.Hell,it still makes me laugh now.

[Javaman]

40. whatever.

:eyes:

[jwirr]

28. In reading James Howard Kunstler that is what I understand. If we

are going to use these alternatives we need to get them working good enough so that they can create their own materials and repair. I am afraid we have waited too long. Also I agree with him that these ideas should be adjusted to local scales.

[glinda]

8. Why not keep it local?

Hi from mid-MN, Eric! We can buy milk, eggs and meat locally so why not solar panels?

[Javaman]

13. I understand your point, but...

unlike farming, solar isn't a naturally occurring commodity.

what could be done is to develop, much like was done in the old days of rail, have the materials transported directly via train to the manufacturing sites.

But then the assembled panels would still need to be moved to where ever they are to be installed, thus, in current transportation vein, means fossil fuels.

Then, and this is the part that really concerns me, the various exotic materials that are used generate waste in the form of heavy metals. You have to ask yourself a very important question, regardless of how good the panel manufacture is about keeping things clean, do you want to potentially expose you or your family to those toxins?

There is so much at play with solar panels.

like someone else said in this thread, there is no form of energy that isn't without it's issues.

[phantom power]

6. There is no risk free energy.

[Javaman]

10. Exactly. I as I stated above...

there are still whole portions of society that think solar panels magically fall from the sky and install themselves.

[zipplewrath]

9. Silicon Solar

The whole article presumes that the only form of "solar energy" is silicon based solar cells. As neat as they are, the far more efficient thing to do with solar is concentrate it and heat something up.

But there is also this:

"The solar energy industry is running into some of the same problems . . . we've seen in the electronics industry," whose waste is polluting U.S. landfills and contaminating groundwater with harmful substances such as mercury and chromium, Davis said.

The key here is that this is already a problem in the electronics industry. It's nothing new. It is a problem that already needs to be "fixed". Furthermore, there will be economic stimulation in fixing it. Gore was talking about this 10 years ago. One of the "solutions" to the outsourcing of our jobs is to develop technologies to fix these problems, AND SELL THEM. Don't just force the Chinese to use cleaner technologies, SELL IT TO THEM!. These are the kinds of "intrastructure" developments we need (amongst others). New technologies to create the greener economy of the future.

[Javaman]

11. Very valid point. nt

[kristopher]

16. It is always good to recognize adverse possiblities.

However, the reason "everybody loves solar" is because it is a low impact technology.
The EROEI for solar PV is between 20:1 and 40:1 and trending upwards. The only energy technology that has a better return is wind.

The article says "You can't just call your product green and close your eyes to what's happening in the supply chain". I doubt if there is any sane person that disagrees. However, other than the similarity of product to the electronics industry, is there specific cases in the US where problems exist? And is there reason to think that an administration that pushes for rapid and widespread deployment of solar would embrace values that fail to take proper measures to deal with solar's associated environmental issues?

As I said, it is good to recognize adverse possibilities and take action to mitigate them; but if we compare the challenge of dealing with nuclear wastes to that posed by solar, I think it is clear we can do this right.

[Javaman]

19. I agree.

I just think the general public needs to be educated as to the waste that is produced from solar manufacture and how it can be properly dealt with.

[kristopher]

24. You're coming across more as scaremongering than educating.

No offense intended, just my observation.

[Javaman]

27. really, regulating heavy metals is scaremongering?

sorry you think that.

[kristopher]

29. Regulating isn't.

But review the thread and see if you are focused on regulating while moving forward or promoting negativity for negativity's sake.

I'm the same way regarding home wind systems. I know how much of a waste of money they are and much more effective that money is when applied to large scale wind, so I get a real case of the ass when I encounter someone enthusiastic about small scale systems. However, I've slowly learned that my negative view isn't always that relevant to the values behind such enthusiasm.

[Javaman]

31. oh lord..

look, if my evidence in regards to solar panels doesn't satisfy you, fine, but like I stated, I was telling you what is actually happening in the arch industry. that is not scaremongering. that is fact.

and with every type of energy produced there is always a price to pay. if we think that we are going to get waste free solar that is pure ignorance.

my mission here is to state quite clearly, that we must be watch dogs on all forms of power including solar. I want solar but I want it regulated and regulated correctly, not bushs* form of regulation.

So me pointing out that there are risks in the manufacturing solar and that is considered scaremongering, that is plainly foolish.

there is no golden parachutes.

[zipplewrath]

30. It's the connection

I think the real problem is "connecting" this problem to "solar". There's nothing unique about this problem with respect to solar cells. It's not even clear it is a greater problem for solar than other electronics. Writing such an article in the context of "solar" implies something unique about the relationship. And really, if one wants to discuss this in the context of solar, it would seem that it needs to be placed in the perspective of some alternatives like coal ash, nuclear waste, or even the environmental impact of hydroelectric. Regardless of solar, there is a waste stream problem in the electronics industry. And regardless of solar, there is a waste product problem with energy production. We can discuss either problem, and solar's contribution can surely be part of it. But the discussion shouldn't be solely about solar because the solutions aren't going to come soley FROM solar.

[Javaman]

32. That was well stated. I see your point and agree. nt

[XemaSab]

35. .

[kristopher]

36. ..

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. That is true, but the same can be said for ANY energy production.

Wind, solar, geothermal, and particularly nuclear, they all have problems at the front end (manufacturing) and the back end (recycling), but of course so does fossil fuels which has problems at both ends AND the middle.

It calls for caution, not for maintaining the status quo.

[Javaman]

34. Exactly. :) nt

[NNadir]

42. Bullshit.

Particularly nuclear?

Nuclear's external costs have been tested by more than 50 years of industrial practice on an industrial exajoule scale.

Solar energy has been tested by 50 years of wishful thinking and myopic cheering.

Solar energy will never produce an exajoule if it hasn't done so. In fact, the attempted scale up with blind stumbling and selective attention IS the status quo and looking rationally at what works isn't.