Solar Industry Grapples With Hazardous Wastes

[TruthSeeker56]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Homeowners on the hunt for sparkling solar panels are lured by ads filled with images of pristine landscapes and bright sunshine, and words about the technology's benefits for the environment — and the wallet.

What customers may not know is that there's a dirtier side.

While solar is a far less polluting energy source than coal or natural gas, many panel makers are nevertheless grappling with a hazardous waste problem. Fueled partly by billions in government incentives, the industry is creating millions of solar panels each year and, in the process, millions of pounds of polluted sludge and contaminated water.

To dispose of the material, the companies must transport it by truck or rail far from their own plants to waste facilities hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of miles away.

The fossil fuels used to transport that waste, experts say, is not typically considered in calculating solar's carbon footprint, giving scientists and consumers who use the measurement to gauge a product's impact on global warming the impression that solar is cleaner than it is.

After installing a solar panel, "it would take one to three months of generating electricity to pay off the energy invested in driving those hazardous waste emissions out of state," said Dustin Mulvaney, a San Jose State University environmental studies professor who conducts carbon footprint analyses of solar, biofuel and natural gas production.

LINK: Solar industry grapples with hazardous wastes - Yahoo! News

I wonder if Al Gore is going into convulsions. Nice to see our tax dollars are working for us.

 

[Deepbluediver]

Solar Power will be the dominant source of energy production in the future. It is inevitable (barring total destruction of the human race, or something like that).
This is simply because it is the most abundant and least-limited source of energy on our planet.

But this does not mean the change will be smooth, quick, or cheap, and the government should stop trying to force solar-panel production onto a free-market economy. If they really want to help, the money could be much better spent funding research grants to make solar panels lighter and more efficient, and improving technology for the storage and transportation of energy.

 

[Old Rocks]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Homeowners on the hunt for sparkling solar panels are lured by ads filled with images of pristine landscapes and bright sunshine, and words about the technology's benefits for the environment — and the wallet.

What customers may not know is that there's a dirtier side.

While solar is a far less polluting energy source than coal or natural gas, many panel makers are nevertheless grappling with a hazardous waste problem. Fueled partly by billions in government incentives, the industry is creating millions of solar panels each year and, in the process, millions of pounds of polluted sludge and contaminated water.

To dispose of the material, the companies must transport it by truck or rail far from their own plants to waste facilities hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of miles away.

The fossil fuels used to transport that waste, experts say, is not typically considered in calculating solar's carbon footprint, giving scientists and consumers who use the measurement to gauge a product's impact on global warming the impression that solar is cleaner than it is.

After installing a solar panel, "it would take one to three months of generating electricity to pay off the energy invested in driving those hazardous waste emissions out of state," said Dustin Mulvaney, a San Jose State University environmental studies professor who conducts carbon footprint analyses of solar, biofuel and natural gas production.

LINK: Solar industry grapples with hazardous wastes - Yahoo! News

I wonder if Al Gore is going into convulsions. Nice to see our tax dollars are working for us.

I wonder if you have a brain? All manufacturing creates waste. It is how we dispose of that waste that is important. Given that the coal mining and the burning of coal is the biggest source of pollution on this planet, I find little problem with the very minor waste that the production of solar panels produces in nations like the US and Germany.

Heavy metals and coal - SourceWatch

Heavy metal refers to any metallic chemical element that has a high density and is toxic or poisonous at low concentrations. Coal contains many heavy metals, as it is created through compressed organic matter containing virtually every element in the periodic table - mainly carbon, but also heavy metals. The heavy metal content of coal varies by coal seam and geographic region. A variety of chemicals (mostly metals) are associated with coal that are either found in the coal directly or in the layers of rock that lie above and between the seams of coal.[1][2]

Small amounts of heavy metals can be necessary for health, but too much may cause acute or chronic toxicity (poisoning). Many of the heavy metals released in the mining and burning of coal are environmentally and biologically toxic elements, such as lead, mercury, nickel, tin, cadmium, antimony, and arsenic, as well as radio isotopes of thorium and strontium.[3]

The electric power sector is the largest source of toxic pollutants in the United States, due to coal ash and coal waste, which contain toxins such as heavy metals.[4] Each year, the waste left over from burning coal generates 125 to 130 million tons of coal ash and coal sludge -- 40% of that waste finds it way into new products and 60% is stored in ponds or pits, which can present health and environmental risks if released into ground water.[5] Despite this, as of March 2010 coal ash is categorized as nonhazardous and is not regulated by the EPA.[6]

 

[RoadVirus]

So much for "Good for the environment".

When will Obama send in his Gestapo EPA on the nasty polluting Solar industry and crush it like a cockroach like they're trying to do with the Coal industry?