Gary J Sibio
How surprised would you be if you were told that solar energy is not a safe method of producing electricity? After all, it’s constantly being presented as the safe and reasonable alternative to fossil fuels and nuclear power. This may not be an accurate picture.
In November of 2016 Japan’s Environment Ministry predicted that the amount of waste produced by Japan’s solar panels will rise from 10,000 tons to 800,000 tons per year. They have no way of disposing of this waste.In the USA California leads the country in solar power yet they also have no way of safely disposing of the waste generated.
Europe does require companies who make solar panels to collect them when their usefulness is past and dispose of them. (Solar panels have a lifetime of approximately 25 years.)So how bad is the problem? Very:
- The production of solar panels requires the use of sodium hydroxide and hydrofluoric acid, both caustic chemicals. In addition, the process produces greenhouse gases.
- Solar panels create 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear power plants per unit of energy generated. Let’s assume that, for the next 25 years, we generate the same amount of energy by nuclear power as was generated worldwide in 2016. The amount of waste generated would cover a football field to the height of 52 meters, about the height of the Leaning Tower of Pisa. To generate the same amount of electricity using solar panels would create a pile of toxic wast 16 kilometers tall, twice the height of Mount Everest.
- Countries in which solar panel waste is dumped – China, India and Ghana – burn the waste in order to retrieve the valuable copper. As the plastic in them burns, it gives off toxic fumes that are not only carcinogenic but also produce birth defects if inhaled. Waste from solar panels includes heavy metals such as lead, chromium and cadmium, all very dangerous to humans especially if it leaches into the groundwater.
- Unlike nuclear waste which is monitored, solar panel waste tends to end up with old computers and other electronic waste, There are no controls governing its treatment.
Before we decide to “go solar,” we need to look at the facts and see if this is in our best interests. Will solar make things better for us or cause even worse problems.
There were supposed to be sources listed at the end of this article but, for some reason, they aren’t there. Here they are:
Sources
Desai, Jemin & Nelson, Mark. 21 Jun 2017. Environmental Progress News: Are we headed for a solar waste crisis? http://www.environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/6/21/are-we-headed-for-a-solar-waste-crisis
Nunez, Christina. 11 Nov 2014. National Geographic: How Green Are Those Solar Panels, Really? http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/11/141111-solar-panel-manufacturing-sustainability-ranking/
Ritz, Erica. 10 Feb 2013. The Blaze: Associated Press: Solar Energy Actually Has a Big ‘Hazardous Waste Problem’ (And How Much Did Solyndra Contaminate?) http://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/02/10/associated-press-solar-energy-actually-has-a-big-hazardous-waste-problem-and-how-much-did-solyndra-contaminate/
Scott, Dylan. 29 Jun 2017 Technocracy News & Trends: Solar Energy Produces 300 Times More Toxic Waste Than Does Nuclear Power https://www.technocracy.news/solar-energy-produces-300-times-toxic-waste-nuclear-power/
Thank you so much for the info, we better know the disadvantages before we use
You’re very welcome. (Sorry for the delay in responding. I just saw your comment this evening.)
Lol it’s OK, better than never
Very informative article Gary. Thank you for the heads up.
You’re very welcome, Carol
Interesting article!
Thank you
Eish… maybe wind power is the way to go!
That has its problems also but, as far as I know, not to the degree of solar. Right now our best viable option seems to be natural gas. It’s clean and it’s cheap.
So nice
Thanks, Olga
🙂
Thanks
Solar panels create 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear power plants per unit of energy generated.
Seriuolsy you have to cite sources for information like this. While you certainly have information, you don’t have sources.
1. The average lifespan of solar waste is 25 years. (per your article)
2. The AVERAGE life span of Nuclear waste is closer to 250 years. So by definition (that comes from the US DOE Publication on radioactive power plant waste 2012 sometimes called the Hanover Report), you are misrepresenting the information. Plus there are other methods in replacing solar panels than burning. While that is done in some places, it is not done around the world. In many heavily solar countries, the waste is actually ground into powder and then reused.
I listed my sources at the bottom of the article.
It was not my intention to prove nuclear energy safe. I am personally opposed to nuclear energy. My intention was to expose the lie that solar energy is clean. It is not.
First of all, the amount of waste produced by Solar (as listed in various articles) is roughly 1/10 of what you have listed here.
Wind turbines do not kill a significant number of birds in any US or International state.
The study from Japan you’ve listed has been questioned by a number of scientific entities.
Here’s evidence to the contrary from the Audubon Society: https://www.audubon.org/news/will-wind-turbines-ever-be-safe-birds
That study shows a number, but the number is wildly debated. There are competing studies that show many more birds are killed.
However, all of them are between 2015 and 2016. The power companies can’t afford the alignment costs when multiple birds hit the propeller units. They have implemented sound and other barriers to scare the birds.
Plus the studies are across all wind turbines in the US. there are more than 24000 wind turbines in the US today.
Great post, thanks for sharing!
Thank you. I’m glad you enjoyed it.
Interesting information, regards
Thanks
Very informative post.
Thanks