3 ms·

> There are many alternatives to solar other than burning coal. For example, you can build a nuclear plant or hydro dam, or use more natural gas or biomass. The

by creato 7y ago

> There are many alternatives to solar other than burning coal. For example, you can build a nuclear plant or hydro dam, or use more natural gas or biomass. The world is not divided into solar v. coal -- solar is not even a major player in global energy right now. Really? You're pointing out solar panels have a waste disposal problem and then name nuclear as an alternative? Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of nuclear too, and just about every other alternative you mentioned. I just think it's absurd to be worrying about solar panel waste in the larger context here. Hydro dams flood a lot of land, natural gas releases a lot of CO2. > To understand the challenges of solar waste, it’s helpful to understand how the panels are built. There are different types of solar panels, but most of them contain aluminum, glass, silver, and an elastic material called ethylene-vinyl acetate. The problem is that they can also contain more dangerous and sometimes cancer-causing, materials such as lead, chromium, and cadmium. Functional panels are sealed off with glass and are very safe. But when the glass breaks or the panels are damaged, those substances can leak. Doesn't sound like anything not already found in a coal fly ash pond [1]. You can probably simply dump deprecated solar panels in a pile with a dirt berm next to the solar plant and come out way ahead of a coal power plant. I'm not saying this isn't a problem that should be dealt with. I just do not believe this is a problem that would be even 1% as bad as the problem we have right now. I think that if your line of reasoning results in even a slight delay of the deprecation of a coal power plant at the expense of solar development, we've come out way behind in terms of environmental impact. If you are going to claim this is a problem, I think we should see evidence for that compared to alternatives that actually exist or can realistically be built. How much lead, cadmium, chromium end up in the environment from power generation today? And how much would do so if we disposed of solar panels in even the worst possible manner? 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly_ash#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly_ash#Examples

rsj_hn 7y ago
Nuclear generates waste, but it's several orders of magnitude less, so it's much easier to manage. For coal, absolutely, there is fly ash, but if your plan is to just dump the current global production of aluminum into ponds every year, you are going to have a problem. These materials need to be recycled, not dumped. E.g. for a normal 2 inch thick cell. You have a volume of 600 million cubic meters that needs to be disposed of annually, and it's growing each year by 3%. The problem here is that people don't realize the scale of the issue -- and I was quite generous in my estimates.

by creato 7y ago

rsj_hn 7y ago

Nuclear generates waste, but it's several orders of magnitude less, so it's much easier to manage. For coal, absolutely, there is fly ash, but if your plan is to just dump the current global production of aluminum into ponds every year, you are going to have a problem. These materials need to be recycled, not dumped. E.g. for a normal 2 inch thick cell. You have a volume of 600 million cubic meters that needs to be disposed of annually, and it's growing each year by 3%. The problem here is that people don't realize the scale of the issue -- and I was quite generous in my estimates.