4 ms·

> solar bans Important to note than most of these bans are about large-scale utility level solar installations. We're talking multi-million dollar, multi-decad

> solar bans Important to note than most of these bans are about large-scale utility level solar installations. We're talking multi-million dollar, multi-decade industrial operations over many acres. Not putting a few PV panels on a roof. It's light industry and has significant environmental impact. Less impact than a coal plant for the same amount of power capacity, but still a non-zero local cost to pay. Why wouldn't you have a say in an industrial facility built next door? It's well within the rights of every local community to do that calculus for themselves and have at least a chance of appeal - otherwise you risk a world where a privileged class of decision makers can literally bulldoze the homes of citizens in the name of "progress". Yes it's happened before (see the history of the US interstate system, power grid, water infrastructure, etc) which is why communities are now leveraging their ban-power instead of getting bulldozed.

jimmydorry 3y ago
>Less impact than a coal plant for the same amount of power capacity For the same amount of "power capacity", you are talking about covering an area multiple times bigger in PV panels. The health impact is reduced to zero, but the environmental impact is ball-parks bigger making it a non-zero trade-off.
singhrac 3y ago
I am a big renewables fan and there is some truth to this. Utility-scale solar installations are not, today, low-touch operations. You need inverters, often you need a substation with a transformer to e.g. 69 kV. You need to level ground to make them feasible to maintain for decades. You might need a reactive compensator. The comparison to coal is where you lost me, though. The coal plant and corresponding emissions will kill hundreds of people in your county over the years. The other thing to consider is that if your power prices become local (as they can be in Texas), you can really benefit from negative energy prices in the afternoon. I mean the economics are terrific, honestly.
- perrygeo 3y ago
  Not sure what you're on about re: coal. I literally said solar has "less impact than a coal plant", so we seem to be in agreement.

jimmydorry 3y ago

>Less impact than a coal plant for the same amount of power capacity For the same amount of "power capacity", you are talking about covering an area multiple times bigger in PV panels. The health impact is reduced to zero, but the environmental impact is ball-parks bigger making it a non-zero trade-off.

singhrac 3y ago

I am a big renewables fan and there is some truth to this. Utility-scale solar installations are not, today, low-touch operations. You need inverters, often you need a substation with a transformer to e.g. 69 kV. You need to level ground to make them feasible to maintain for decades. You might need a reactive compensator. The comparison to coal is where you lost me, though. The coal plant and corresponding emissions will kill hundreds of people in your county over the years. The other thing to consider is that if your power prices become local (as they can be in Texas), you can really benefit from negative energy prices in the afternoon. I mean the economics are terrific, honestly.

perrygeo 3y ago
Not sure what you're on about re: coal. I literally said solar has "less impact than a coal plant", so we seem to be in agreement.