PeanutSalsa t1_j7vokf2 wrote
Are there any negatives with solar and wind energy, and if so, what are they?
Sammy_Roth t1_j7vpl43 wrote
Most certainly -- every energy technology has its downsides. With solar and wind, destruction of wildlife habitat can be a big one. I wrote about that here, in a story about America's largest wind farm, currently being built by a conservative billionaire in Wyoming: https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2022-08-23/wyoming-clean-energy-california.
That said, it's definitely possible to limit the damage. Also wrote here about research looking at the best places to build solar and wind, with the least harm: https://www.latimes.com/environment/newsletter/2022-10-06/solar-and-wind-farms-can-hurt-the-environment-a-new-study-offers-solutions-boiling-point.
Also worth putting into context that the environmental (and human health) damage from fossil fuels is far, far greater than anything from renewable energy. I looked at some of the research on that point here: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-10-05/huntington-beach-orange-county-oil-spill-fossil-fuel-environmental-health-harms.
Hope this is helpful. Thank you for the question!
openly_gray t1_j7vtaux wrote
In that context let me ask you if a more aggressive promotion of rooftop solar (both residential and business) could be a possible solution
Sammy_Roth t1_j7vvga8 wrote
The more rooftop solar gets built, definitely, the fewer land-use conflicts and the less destruction of wildlife habitat. But will also caution that every detailed study I've seen still finds a huge need for large solar and wind farms to meet climate goals, even in very optimistic scenarios for rooftop solar. See, for instance: https://www.latimes.com/environment/newsletter/2021-01-07/how-rooftop-solar-could-save-americans-473-billion-dollars-boiling-point.
Will have more discussion of this very question in the next part of Repowering the West. Feel free to follow along here: https://www.latimes.com/projects/repowering-the-west/.
Thank you for the question!
Crabby_Monkey t1_j7w8awm wrote
In your opinion, in places like Arizona would it help to require new home builds to automatically include solar and home batteries.
It seems like that would have several benefits.
Sammy_Roth t1_j7w8zgd wrote
California has actually done this! See L.A. Times coverage from a few years ago: https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-solar-panels-20180509-story.html.
I don't know if this has gotten serious consideration in Arizona, but definitely other local governments looking at the concept. Thank you for the good question!
openly_gray t1_j7vwtq9 wrote
Thanks
HAAAGAY t1_j7wjmb5 wrote
Absolutely monstrous issues. They will never be the answer to climate change, it's just a supplement. We need nuclear or the world dies tbh.
InsultThrowaway t1_j7yor2w wrote
Yeah, I often look around and think to myself:
"What the world really needs right now is another ten or twenty Chernobyls and Fukishimas".
JustAnAveragePenis t1_j80b4b7 wrote
That's old nuclear science, not the new one.
HAAAGAY t1_j80yafj wrote
Educate yourself then you can complain about it
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments