Cost savings of renewable energy might outweigh costs of adapting to renewable energy

Here’s a recent article that has the hard numbers from California solar manufacturers reports to the State:

The state records show the 17 companies, which had 44 manufacturing facilities in California, produced 46.5 million pounds of sludge and contaminated water from 2007 through the first half of 2011. Roughly 97 percent of it was taken to hazardous waste facilities throughout the state, but more than 1.4 million pounds were transported to nine other states: Arkansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Nevada, Washington, Utah, New Mexico and Arizona. Several solar energy experts said they have not calculated the industry’s total waste and were surprised at what the records showed.

The roughly 20-year life of a solar panel still makes it some of the cleanest energy technology currently available. Producing solar is still significantly cleaner than fossil fuels. Energy derived from natural gas and coal-fired power plants, for example, creates more than 10 times more hazardous waste than the same energy created by a solar panel, according to Mulvaney.

The article points to Dustin Mulvaney a professor of environmental studies at San Jose State – he seems to be a “good guy” i.e. not a oil/gas/etc shill.
There is a speech by him here:
Mulvaney shares the toxic side of solar energy | Robert & Patricia Switzer Foundation

Edit – was curious about how this would compare to nuclear… (I know, apples/oranges)
Just looked at the Nuclear Energy Institute’s waste info page – US reactors produce a total of ~5 million lbs of used fuel a year. The article above implies over 10 million lbs per year of toxic waste just from California PV manufacturers. The physicist in me needs to point out that the reactor waste at least becomes less toxic with time – the PV waste will likely remain toxic until swallowed by our red-giant sun.

1 Like