Live data from Hacker News

California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

latimes.com

51–60 of 214 posts

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#51
post #30
post #12

It took me a while to find out why locals were saying solar farms cause dust storms. The locals claim solar farms destabilize the soil. Dust isn’t in the interest of the energy producer because it lowers efficiency so my assumption is that they would do everything to limit dust. I guess I’m surprised that the LA Times would publish a claim like that without comment or caveat.

They’re just reporting what each side is saying without arguing against their claims. They leave it to the reader to make of it what they will. In my personal opinion, this is how reporting should be. Don’t do my thinking for me and don’t lead me in a particular direction. I doubt most people actually believe dust has anything to do with it. They don’t want these infrastructure projects near them, plain and simple.

In my view, this is a problem if each side is making claims without any attempt at quantifying or disclosing the relative magnitude of effects. That's a case where a reporter could do a little digging and fill in those details. For instance, how much dust? How is it stirred up? And so forth. You can still make of it what you will, but with better information.

I encounter the same thing dealing with engineers. They will list a variety of objections to an idea, or "risks," without any attempt at quantifying the issues involved. Managers do this too. If I ask for details, it becomes my job to research it.

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#52
> “These vast open areas are precious for their natural, historical and recreational qualities. But they are fragile, and no amount of mitigation can counter the damage that industrial-scale renewable energy projects would cause,” Fairchild told the supervisors. “Once destroyed, these landscapes can never be brought back.”

Because climate change won't destroy precious fragile landscapes? Okay, here's my deal: you get to keep your precious desert, but as long as you oppose local renewable energy, you can only subsist off the crops, livestock and other resources you can grow in the desert. Why should you benefit from the rest of us sacrificing our own landscapes to save ourselves when you aren't willing to do the same?

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#53
post #30
post #12

It took me a while to find out why locals were saying solar farms cause dust storms. The locals claim solar farms destabilize the soil. Dust isn’t in the interest of the energy producer because it lowers efficiency so my assumption is that they would do everything to limit dust. I guess I’m surprised that the LA Times would publish a claim like that without comment or caveat.

They’re just reporting what each side is saying without arguing against their claims. They leave it to the reader to make of it what they will. In my personal opinion, this is how reporting should be. Don’t do my thinking for me and don’t lead me in a particular direction. I doubt most people actually believe dust has anything to do with it. They don’t want these infrastructure projects near them, plain and simple.

I don’t know whether the claim that solar farms cause dust storms is true or not, but it isn’t a matter of opinion. I want journalists to find experts and scientific evidence and tell me which side is telling the truth.

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#54
San Bernardino County is home to the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility [1], which is a mirror-focused solar thermal power plant. It generates a lot of glare and is controversial for its impact on animals. It also took several years to ramp up to its promised output.

Solar panels don't have problem with glare, but the landscape of the county has large viewsheds of sloping treeless desert, so any facility will have a large visual impact. It also disturbs the ground and replaces the desert scrub with actual bare ground, which is more susceptible to dust, and dust is a problem that plant operators try to combat [2], but have long accepted as an inconvenient reality of siting in the desert.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility [2] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7274289

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#55
post #52

> “These vast open areas are precious for their natural, historical and recreational qualities. But they are fragile, and no amount of mitigation can counter the damage that industrial-scale renewable energy projects would cause,” Fairchild told the supervisors. “Once destroyed, these landscapes can never be brought back.” Because climate change won't destroy precious fragile landscapes? Okay, here's my deal: you get…

Solar and wind will never be enough.

https://quillette.com/2019/02/27/why-renewables-cant-save-th...

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#56
post #35

It's a fucking desert.

I don't agree with the decision, either, but a desert is a biome that deserves respect like any other.

I hadnt heard this point of view yet. I never saw a desert as something worth preserving, quite the contrary actually. Afforestation projects to green deserts seem absolutely wonderful. Why do you think its a biome worth preserving? Its places hostile to life. Are there negative effects caused by a lack of deserts?

edit: In case anyone else wonders, there would be a negative effect, as deserts are net carbon sinks.

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#57

What's the useful life of modern solar panels? Will these solar farms have to be decommissioned or retrofit in the future, and will we have to deal with a bunch of toxic material disposal say 30 years from now? I guess it certainly seems like a no-brainer to build these things in deserts with consistent sunlight, but I'm just curious if there are externalities we're not thinking of yet because we haven't had to.

Everything has externalities, but imho carbon emitted today is way worse than a smallish amount of toxic waste in 30 years.

The worst case scenario for toxic waste is probably the Hanford Site, which is obviously awful but it's not exactly causing global climate catastrophe like carbon might.

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#58

So the beautiful desert landscapes can not be sullied with these solar panel eyesores. Fair enough. We should just put the sustainable solar power that these same residents want access to on arable farm land instead?!?

That's a great idea. I suggest putting it on the arable farmland that supplies their communities. Let them figure out how to get crops from the desert.

Re: California's San Bernardino County restricts construction of solar, wind farms

#60
post #52

> “These vast open areas are precious for their natural, historical and recreational qualities. But they are fragile, and no amount of mitigation can counter the damage that industrial-scale renewable energy projects would cause,” Fairchild told the supervisors. “Once destroyed, these landscapes can never be brought back.” Because climate change won't destroy precious fragile landscapes? Okay, here's my deal: you get…

Solar and wind will never be enough. https://quillette.com/2019/02/27/why-renewables-cant-save-th...

Is your point that we should stop building any solar or wind? Because if that is not your point, I don't understand what you're trying to say.
Post reply on HN