161–170 of 214 posts
Wide open rural land, little environmental or people impact, some of the best consistent sun in the world
Destroying a virgin desert ecosystem with an industrial installation is not little environmental impact.
Wide open rural land, little environmental or people impact, some of the best consistent sun in the world
Do you live in this community? My guess is no. And that’s the crux of the issue, though the article buries the lede somewhat.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 wi…
It creates a logic chain that could happen, without any discussion of actual probabilities or costs.
For example banning of assault rifles, discusses how it could save lives. People are surprised to learn that there are less than 200 deaths per year from any type of rifle.
The same goes for universal background checks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s so obvious you shouldn’t need evidence. And that's how we end up with things like "obviously, we cannot have a climate change, I mean it's cold on the outside!!".
An experiment you can reproduce in a vehicle driving on a dirt road is a bit easier than measuring global climate change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When projects like these are planned, they consider the entire lifecycle of the project, including end of life.
People said the asme thing with Nuclear. Just because they say they are doesn't mean they actually are.
Lawmakers want their own share and haven't been given one.
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…
> Solar panels don't have problem with glare You clearly haven't been on a highway leading straight towards a hillside panel cluster [1] at that particular time of day and year when the reflection trail of the panels passes over the road. It's much worse than going towards dawn or sunset because those are toned down do much by atmospheric attenuation. All you can do is blindly maintaining speed and hoping that nobody…
It's the same light from the sun that you say is attenuated by the atmosphere before reaching your eyes that is reflected from the solar panels. It is literally impossible for it to be worse.
-->
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Solar panels don't have problem with glare You clearly haven't been on a highway leading straight towards a hillside panel cluster [1] at that particular time of day and year when the reflection trail of the panels passes over the road. It's much worse than going towards dawn or sunset because those are toned down do much by atmospheric attenuation. All you can do is blindly maintaining speed and hoping that nobody…
EDIT: I apologize. I misunderstood the statement. It's the same light from the sun that you say is attenuated by the atmosphere before reaching your eyes that is reflected from the solar panels. It is literally impossible for it to be worse. -->