Solar - Green?

[widefat]

The tech behind solar power has grown by leaps over the last few years. The systems are more efficient, the panels are cheaper, and the energy produced is clean.
All is good right? Solar is the answer?

Central Va. has been invaded by companies wanting to drop solar plants on large tracts of undeveloped land. Here is one example -

Citizens group urges Culpeper board to reject Cricket Solar project | Business | starexponent.com

1300 acres of panels that will turn a beautiful area into a industrial nightmare.

Thoughts?

 

[shooterdon]

I feel the same about wind mills. Years ago saw a line of them polluting a mountain ridge...believe it was in KY or TN.

I am not convinced they offer cost savings or a decent ROI. I priced out a solar system three years ago and it was a very long time (over 10 years) to breakeven.

 

[widefat]

I feel the same about wind mills. Years ago saw a line of them polluting a mountain ridge...believe it was in KY or TN.

I am not convinced they offer cost savings or a decent ROI. I priced out a solar system three years ago and it was a very long time (over 10 years) to breakeven.

Absolutely - the environmental groups in my area push hard on solar for the home. What they don't tell you is the length of time to get ROI.
Also in my area - I am close enough to that crap-pot Northern Va area that these huge solar farms are an excellent commercial investment. NOVA is exploding with Data Centers; they have to get power from somewhere.

 

[KennyG]

This is going to continue to be a very contentious topic. One of the problems is that we really can't easily compare the costs of power generation. Almost all forms of electric generation are provided with subsidies that may or may not be obvious. These include support for production of equipment, direct price supports and favorable tax treatment.

In addition, there are policies and infrastructure support that are not easily identified as subsidies. Renewable energy often gets a "mandate to purchase" meaning a utility has to buy all the power whether it needs it or not and whether it is the cheapest option. New facilities of all types often locate near existing transmission lines to minimize their installation costs at the expense of existing plants. Because of the intermittent nature of solar and wind, they require gas or coal plants to be built and then underutilized, resulting in higher overall costs. Until some type of storage becomes feasible, this cost will exist, and even if we have storage, it will be a significant cost to be added to solar.

Finally, we don't have a good way to include external costs. Nuclear plants have a specific part of the electric rate that goes to decommissioning and waste disposal. Coal plants typically don't have clear funding for long term ash disposal. Fossil fuel plants, in general, don't address long term emission costs. As noted above, most renewable projects take large amounts of land and completely transform the natural landscape.

The recent advances in wind and solar area impressive, but the politicians and activists who see an all-renewable future are looking through rose colored glasses. My guess is we are nearing saturation in some areas with wind and solar.

 

[Egon]

If we could eliminate those unsightly urban conglomeration’s of asphalt, steel and concrete the number of unsightly electrical producing areas could be reduced.

Eliminate the requirement and the requirement services will be eliminated!

 

[LD48750]

How much "fossil fuel" was used to produce and install these solar & wind free energy sources?

 

[shooterdon]

If we could eliminate those unsightly urban conglomeration’s of asphalt, steel and concrete the number of unsightly electrical producing areas could be reduced.

Eliminate the requirement and the requirement services will be eliminated!

It would be more efficient to eliminate the populations of those "conglomerations". Neutron bombs perhaps???

 

[2LaneCruzer]

Don't forget; electrical companies are public utilities, and at least in this state, in return for intense regulation, are guaranteed a "reasonable" profit. I think solar power is best implemented through installation on each individual unit, bypassing the big generating stations, but then the utility has much less control. And yes, I think for the most part subsidies to wind power, etc. are mostly political scams; the R&D is essential, but it should be the job of the utilities to do this. It is deductible, you know.

 

[cqaigy2]

How much "fossil fuel" was used to produce and install these solar & wind free energy sources?

I was wondering the same thing when driving by a coal power plant in Wyoming. It was huge, with miles of train cars full of coal, going in and miles of empty cars going out. How much fossil fuel to create and maintain? Also thought how wonderful it would be to live next door to it.

 

[CobyRupert]

The tech behind solar power has grown by leaps over the last few years. The systems are more efficient, the panels are cheaper, and the energy produced is clean.
All is good right? Solar is the answer?

Central Va. has been invaded....

1300 acres of panels that will turn a beautiful area into a industrial nightmare.

Thoughts?

Industrial nightmare?

Compared to what?: Three Mile Island/Chernobyl/Fukushima? Coal Plants? Acid rain-dead lakes (NY has many, partially due to Ohio coal plants). Fracking?

Seem to me I've heard a thing or two about West Virginia (Virginia?) having some mountain top removals for coal. The run-off. Streams contaminated. Slag. You may not like panels, and can argue the economics, their environmental impact (in their use (replacement of other sources) and their manufacturer), effect on grid stability, etc... but I wouldn't call them industrial nightmares. :2cents: