The Case for Risk Based Environmental Analysis of Floating Solar Cells.

[NNadir]

The paper to which I'll refer in this post is this one: Making a Case for Environmental Risk-Based Monitoring of Floating Solar Systems
Mainak Bhattacharya, Arun Kumar, Arvind Kumar Nema, Sovik Das, and Arya Vijayanandan Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (6), 2595-2597

I make no secret of my abhorrence of so called "renewable energy" because of its unacceptable energy to mass ratio, its unreliability, its dependence on fossil fuels, and the bizarre definition by many people calling for the industrialization of wilderness for short lived consumer junk as "green."

I often note that while people have recently begun, despite the data showing its uselessness, to claim that affection or affectation for so called "renewable energy" is about climate change. It is no such thing. The mindless embrace of "renewable energy" has done nothing to address climate change. As I often note, the more money and resources that are squandered on renewable energy - in this waste is growing, not falling - the faster the degradation of the atmosphere is proceeding.

Numbers don't lie: At the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory, a Terrifying, Startling Week and Month, New Records Everywhere.

One still sees dubious affection for so called "renewable energy" in the scientific literature - which is after all a human enterprise, in no way oracular although guided toward truth by process, but still subject to human flaws - but I have noted increasing questioning of the enterprise in recent years, based on the realities that this reactionary program are now presenting.

Having destroyed and decimated much land mass, now there is active discussion of destroying bodies of water for this affectation, so I welcome this paper's immediate questioning of the enterprise, looking before we leap. We already have wind turbines at sea, the plastic coating on the vanes being known to peel into microplastics, and now we want to add plastic floats for wind turbines.

The authors of this paper note the risks of this ongoing nonsense:

Solar photovoltaic cell-based renewable energy is considered as one of the major alternatives to coal to counter the challenge of a growing global carbon footprint. Apart from traditional rooftop and land solar setups, floating solar systems (FPVC) are attracting attention in the energy sector because of the non-necessity of land, a reduced rate of evaporation, an increase in power generation efficiency due to the cooling effect provided by surface water, etc. In a recent article, it was estimated that installation of FPVC in 10% of the total area of the reservoirs presently used for hydropower projects throughout the world would meet the present electrical capacity of fossil fuel-based power plants. (1) Although FPVC might be advantageous in the power energy sector, its potential impact on the aquatic flora and fauna is poorly understood. (2) In this work, a case for risk-based monitoring of FPVC aims to sustain FPVC-based power production activity on a long-term basis.

The FPVC typically consist of (1) floating pontoons made of materials like polyethylene (PE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), and pyrocarbon; (2) floating electrical sensors and cables and other electronic equipment covered with PE-type materials that contain trace quantities of heavy metals (Al, As, Cu, Mn, Ni, and Zn) and boron; (3) partially or fully submerged anchors and moors made of HDPE and concrete; and (4) tilted solar panels that are not in direct contact with water but occasionally touch the host water body during high tides, heavy winds, rainfall, washing, accidental breakage of solar panels etc. The composition of the solar panels varies depending on their types. The first- and second-generation solar panels mostly used in the energy sector contain Si, Al, Ag, Pb, Cu, Zn, Cd, In, Ga, Se, Mo, and Te. With respect to all of the aforementioned information, three major environmental concerns might arise. (1) Penetration of sunlight into the host water bodies will be hampered, which will subsequently decrease the chlorophyll content and algal population that might further affect the overall ecosystem of the water body. (2) The dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration below the floating solar panel might decrease, which can affect the aquatic biota. (3) Leaching of microplastics, organic carbon, heavy metals, and metalloids from different components of FPVC might cause contamination in the host surface water body (Figure 1). All of these aspects, along with the steps required for systematic management of FPVC projects, are discussed further here...

The key to getting a question answered is to ask it. I applaud these authors for doing so.