Uploaded May 2, 2025
Lessons learned: Solar projects present unique stormwater management challenges
Dec 8, 2017
By Jason Sharp, Adam O’Connor and Mark Priddle
With the passing of the Green Energy Act in Ontario in 2009, the design and construction of utility-scale solar projects in Ontario blossomed. Between 2010 and the end of 2016, it is estimated that more than 100 ten (10) Mega Watt (MW) solar farms were constructed in Ontario. Approvals for these sites were issued by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) under Environmental Compliance Approvals (ECA) or more commonly Renewable Energy Approvals (REA).
A typical 10 MW photovoltaic (PV) installation requires about 40 ha of land for solar panels. Sites selected for such solar projects in Ontario range from flat former agricultural fields with clay soils to rolling diamicton hills and areas of very shallow bedrock. Former land uses (prior to solar development) range from airport properties to scrub forests. Locations for such projects are found all across Ontario but all essentially with a humid continental climatic zone with, on average, about 900 mm of precipitation per year and a water surplus of approximately 200 mm per year.
During the course of construction of a number of these solar projects, unique challenges associated with stormwater management (SWM) arose. Issues relating to turbid runoff occurred, with subsequent impacts to nearby watercourses, neighbouring properties and other downstream locations.
This discussion paper presents a review of the issues with stormwater management, impacts that were caused and remedial measures. The focus is on the experience gained at solar projects located in southeastern Ontario in rolling terrain with adjacent farmlands and watercourses. Overall, the objective is to provide a series of SWM “lessons learned” in the context of utility-scale solar farm, design, construction, operation and maintenance in Ontario.
Site Selection
The selection of a site for solar development is typically based on a number of factors. These include:
- Land availability;
- Land cost;
- Topography;
- Existing site conditions (vegetated field (grass/hay), farmed (row crop), forested, etc.)
- Constraints (water courses, Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), incompatible uses, prime agricultural zoning);
- Community acceptance; and
- Proximity to power grid for connection.
In hindsight, it has become apparent that the selection of sites must place great significance on topography, existing site conditions and constraints such as nearby watercourses and soil types. All of these factors readily influence the volume and flow rate of runoff that, if not properly managed, can result in negative impacts to downstream and neighbouring properties.
In general, undeveloped sites either did not possess known existing stormwater concerns or were in locations where seasonal flooding occurred. In either case, fields would remain untouched until they were stable enough to be worked. However, in a situation where a solar farm is constructed on an existing row crop, the land is drastically transformed from a site that would see minimal usage/disturbance until planting to a site that requires complete year-round accessibility by machines and workers during construction and early stages of operation.
Regulatory involvement, review processes and contractual issues
Under the REA process, public consultation and regulatory review are to be undertaken. Typically, comments are received from the public, all municipal levels of government and Conservation Authorities (if they exist for the area). While the MOECC is the overall approval authority, the process relies on the proponent and their experts to design the project such that potential impacts to the natural environment are mitigated both during construction and when built-out and in commercial operation.
As it relates to the stormwater management component of the review process, these utility scale projects are approved based on a conceptual stormwater management report. These reports typically provided high-level information such as:
- Delineation of the site watersheds;
- Identification of internal drainage areas;
- Completion of high level calculations (typical reports rely on the rational method for calculating peak flows);
- Confirmation that stormwater management is or is not required for the site; and
- Estimation of the scale and locations to accommodate the required stormwater storage.
In some cases, preliminary grading plans are not provided, which may pose the question of whether the proposed drainage areas are constructible. While this information is very useful to identify potential concerns with regard to proximity to watercourses and requirements for stormwater management at a high level, once approved, the vast majority of projects enter into Design Build (DB) contracts with an Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Contractor. The EPC Contractor is then responsible for taking the preliminary information and bringing the project to completion.
EPC contracts must place appropriate emphasis on completing grading, stormwater management and erosion and sediment controls prior to installing panels on racking, cabling installation, making transformers operational, etc. Otherwise, civil work after the fact, which could include grading around piles and panels, would need to be completed. This can be especially challenging as some solar projects have more than 10,000 piles and more than 40,000 live panels.
Design (Stormwater Management)
The design of large (10 MW or more) solar projects in Ontario has experienced a learning curve with respect to minimizing stormwater management issues. A 40 ha solar farm represents a hard surface with concentrated flow developing during a precipitation event. This being said, the hard surface may be discontinuous, with solar panels arranged in rows, but with vegetated surfaces (post-construction) in the dripline of each row. This differs from the design of a typical hard surface such as a roof or parking lot. The design of stormwater management and grading for a solar project is markedly different from how such issues are addressed in urban development, municipal road projects or the construction of provincial highways.
The key issues are: 1) the amount of hard surface and 2) subsequent sediment loading. Non-solar projects generate sediment loading because of sanding and salting operations in winter months. Solar farms do not, in general, sand and salt their roadways. Therefore, a typical solar project is a 40 ha grass field with some gravel roadways (typically 5% of the site by area), ten (10) relatively small transformers and one (1) relatively small substation. In many instances, calculations post- to pre- may indicate that stormwater management is not required. However, based on our experience, stormwater management is generally required, specifically during construction and until the site is fully re-vegetated.
The following is a list of issues that have been identified that, based on our experience, affect the overall volumes and rates of runoff leaving the sites. There is no single guideline developed, to our knowledge, that addresses the calculations and design considerations relating to the issues experienced below:
- Compaction of soils – soils experience significant compaction based on the volume and type of construction activity (drill rigs installing thousands of piles, graders/dozers working the fields, excavators, boom trucks installing racking, numerous trucks, ATVs and other vehicles, etc.); the resulting increase in compaction of soil may cause an increase in runoff and sediment transport until the site is fully re-vegetated.
- Topsoil – The removal of topsoil from a site may result in the loss of vital organic matter required for plant growth. This may result in much less vegetation and/or increased time to re-vegetate the site. On sites where topsoil is not replaced, or is contaminated with subsoil, the lag in full vegetation establishment could extend for a few years. During this time, the bare or partially bare soils may experience erosion and washouts. This may result in the need to re-start the vegetation process: fix the erosion, add topsoil and vegetation (seeding) and/or apply erosion and sediment control measures such as erosion control blankets.
- Soils / depth to bedrock – Often, geotechnical information is provided at the onset of a project, but further studies or investigations may not be conducted. The vast majority of sites are constructed based on soils information from ten test pits or boreholes over a 40 ha site. This may provide only a high level understanding of site soils that may be considered relatively limited information when completing grading, preparing a rock profile for the site or balancing the site based on the cut/fill required. Further complicating designs may be pockets of differing soil types found over a site of this size. The ten test locations may not identify these pockets and modifications in the field may be required.
- Construction methods – Contractors must be careful not to “open up” (remove vegetation and topsoil) an entire site all at once. When severe weather occurs, such a site may experience significant erosion issues and, in some cases, may not possess sufficient erosion and sediment controls to combat the increase in flow from a bare soil surface. The phasing of construction is of great significance with projects of this magnitude and must be addressed during the design stage and implemented during construction.
- Concentrating flow (roadways) – The requirement to access transformers and inverter houses may result in the need to develop an on-site road network. A road network is typically laid out on a plan and each transformer is apportioned a “block” of arrays which make up one-tenth of the area of the project. The road network may not account for the topography, sometimes resulting in roads being located in the least desirable areas, specifically, around the perimeter of the site. This may result in the need to direct runoff via culverts or other means across the roadway and into a ditch or adjacent field with limited opportunity to spread the flow. Sites that have roads that are located on +10% slopes have an increased probability of erosion during major rain/runoff events.
- Concentrated flow (long reaches) – As a function of the work environment and grading activities, relatively long distances (or reaches) of solar developments may be smoothed out to permit the piles/panels to be installed and to promote effective transportation networks. The challenge with this is that the combination of long reaches and the smooth surfaces may result in an increased runoff velocity. Under pre-development conditions, the areas may have had generally similar characteristics, however, without the grading activities, small pockets, depressions, etc. may have existed that would capture runoff, reduce flow velocities, provide opportunity for infiltration and/or ensure that not all runoff left the site. Once smoothed out, runoff may not have had these same opportunities, resulting in more flow running off, collecting and then eroding the soils. Generally speaking, runoff is considered overland sheet flow for up to 30 m (100’), at which point it tends to form shallow concentrated flow. This shallow concentrated flow could extend for several hundred metres and could give rise to issues. It is at this point where runoff could form rills and gullies leading to erosion concerns and sediment transport.
Temporary and permanent measures
As part of the stormwater management design, temporary erosion and sediment control (ESC) measures are required during construction of solar projects, as with any other construction project in Ontario. The design of such measures requires an understanding of construction activities and construction flow. Again, a solar farm differs from other development projects, such as a building, because of the continuous and long-term disturbance of typically un-vegetated ground during construction. This requires unique and more robust ESC measures compared to projects that are more conventional.
These temporary measures become the lifeline of the project. It is clear that any temporary controls should have a site-specific design. That is to say, the designer should be reviewing the flows, volumes and drainage area upstream to ensure the controls are sufficient and will be able to withstand the runoff flow and quality anticipated for the project. A few key examples include:
- Reviewing the sheet flow velocity over bare soils to ensure the need for erosion control matting is or is not required;
- Reviewing flow through rock flow check dams to ensure that runoff overtop is able to be conveyed in a major event (and not washout an adjacent roadway); and
- Reviewing flow through flow spreaders to ensure they are sufficiently wide to distribute the flow.
Permanent SWM and ESC measures may be required to control water and possible sediment transport after full buildout of a solar project. These measures differ from temporary measures as they are designed for the site that has all its panels in place and has been fully re-vegetated. At the design stage, the final SWM and ESC measures that are proposed have generally assumed that the site is fully vegetated. In our experience, the design flows during construction should be increased from the typical post-development conditions to account for the bare or partially bare soils and lack of vegetation within ditches that may increase water velocities.
Construction
Challenges pertaining to SWM and ESC during construction have been encountered at numerous solar projects in Ontario. These challenges may appear early on in the development of sites that are stripped of vegetation (and topsoil) prior to solar panel installation and other site works. Heavy vehicular traffic during construction may exacerbate runoff issues. With the widespread disturbance over the entire area of 40 ha or more, ESC measures may be inadequate. In addition, the desire to complete projects on time may mean that year-round construction takes place, even during the winter and spring thaws.
As noted above, working throughout the winter and spring freshet is possible, and in some instances necessary, to meet tight deadlines. Designs must account for flows over frozen soils or an increase in runoff coefficient during winter/spring thaws. Consequently, standard ESC measures may be inadequate for winter runoff events. Given the scale of the typical solar project, this is an important area of design and enhanced ESC measures such as shot rock roads over existing vegetation and/or sediment traps should be considered.
Seasonal limitations must also be considered. For example, during winter, issues are exacerbated when:
- One cannot install silt fence in the winter into frozen ground (not very easily at least);
- Straw bales are typically not available;
- Straw wattles and mulch silt socks are also not easily installed or readily available.
Understanding that construction during winter months is very difficult to predict and provides a number of challenges, contractors should install specific controls, limit the areas that are opened up, and ensure additional materials (e.g. straw/mulch, erosion control blanket/matting and stone) are available on site to use, if necessary. Although these measures cannot guarantee there will be no issues with erosion and runoff during construction, they may provide a contractor with the necessary means to maintain and stabilize the exposed soils and limit the transport of suspended solids, if such a condition occurred.
Post-Construction
Re-vegetation does not occur immediately following solar panel installation at most sites. In some cases, topsoil is removed and vegetative regrowth may be hindered. In other cases, works are completed late in the year and re-vegetation efforts may not be successful. These conditions may hinder or prevent re-vegetation in, and around, the solar panels. The design conditions for the SWM and ESC measures therefore may not be met. This may lead to challenges with post-construction runoff, even with properly designed and constructed ESC measures in place. The positive impact of a fully vegetated site with properly engineered and constructed SWM measures in controlling runoff and suspended solids movement cannot be overstated. Therefore stripping of vegetation should be avoided wherever possible, and where vegetation must be stripped, the installation of appropriately sized retention/settlement ponds prior to stripping must be considered.
Monitoring
At many sites in Ontario, monitoring of runoff is required under the REA. Typically, total suspended solids (TSS) are required to be tested at locations where water flows off-site. Depending on the discharge location and receiving body, different requirements may apply. In some cases, a fixed limit of 25 mg/L for TSS for water leaving the site (regardless of receiver) may apply. In other cases, TSS in runoff may be limited to a factor increase in turbidity or TSS concentration relative to upstream levels of these parameters.
It should be noted that TSS is not the only compound/contaminant that should be monitored. Depending on the former use of the site, other nutrients (phosphorus, nitrogen etc.) may be present and require testing. Site-specific monitoring criteria should be established.
In all cases where TSS monitoring is conducted, it should be accompanied by a Contingency Plan that provides the Operations and Maintenance staff with a procedure in order to address TSS concerns, should they arise.
Remediation
Following completion of a solar farm, remediation may be required to prevent turbid runoff from leaving the site. This may require new SWM and ESC measures, combined with concerted efforts to revegetate sites. In some cases, new or additional retention ponds may need to be installed and active pumping and water control may be required. Other remediation efforts may include:
- Construction of additional ditching and grading to provide positive drainage from low lying areas;
- Construction of additional piping (culverts, storm sewer) to direct runoff across roads or into storm sewer networks;
- Paving of low level crossings to prevent erosion / granular washouts;
- Addition of topsoil and seeding;
- Placement of erosion control blankets on steep slopes to prevent erosion;
- Application of hydroseed with tackifier to prevent erosion on steep slopes;
- Construction of flow dissipation or flow spreading devices;
- Construction of dry and wet retention ponds;
- Construction of infiltration trenches;
- Placement of fill in low-lying areas to promote positive drainage;
- Construction of roads and roadside ditches to provide safe passage and convey runoff;
- Reconstruction of roadside ditches to ensure subgrade is drained;
- Relocation of arrays of panels;
- Re-alignment of ditches and movement of discharge points from the site;
- Reconnecting existing tile drains destroyed during construction;
- Placing berms to limit adjacent floodwater from entering the site;
- Removing berms to limit concentration of runoff within a site; and
- Use of flocculants to control TSS in runoff water.
Lessons Learned
The identification and correction of issues related to SWM and ESC at solar projects provides a number of “lessons learned” which can be applied to new and existing projects to prevent issues in the future. The following recommendations are presented.
Site selection:
- Avoid sites with steep topography and fine-grained soils;
- Exercise caution with sites adjacent to sensitive surface water receptors (e.g. cold water streams);
- Avoid sites that may be within a floodplain (limits the ability to grade, may result in seasonal flooding);
- Avoid sites with shallow bedrock (if grading is anticipated);
- Avoid ecologically sensitive lands (rare vegetation or species at risk);
- Conduct advanced planning on the front end (advanced biological surveys); and
- Conduct pre-condition surveys – these are essential to ensure the concerns of neighbouring landowners and municipalities may be adequately addressed.
Design:
- Ensure that the design team (electrical design, civil, structural, etc.) communicate to ensure that the design meets all needs, including prevention of erosion and sediment transport;
- Effectively plan the location of SWM measures (e.g. a pond must be located downstream of the development; a pond on top of a hill is not much use);
- Ensure that the design is conservative with respect to runoff potential;
- Provide a reasonable degree of redundancy in designing SWM and ESC measures;
- Ensure that stormwater management design criteria from the MOECC are followed;
- Execute reasonable engineering judgment with respect to the solar farm design; it is not an urban development, municipal road or provincial highway. It should not be designed as such, but it does require a level of sophistication with respect to the collecting and conveying of runoff;
- Review the stormwater design in the context of different storm events (4-hour Chicago storm, 12- and 24-hour SCS storm events); in a number of situations, given the rural nature of most sites, the peak flows may be as a result of the shorter duration events but the SWM measures (ponds) will need to be sized for the volume of the longer events (24-hour);
- Ensure the design takes construction over winter months into account;
- Ensure the design uses “bare soils” calculations to account for runoff during construction;
- Ensure sufficient geotechnical data are available, including depth to groundwater and percolation rates (if designing infiltration trenches);
- Review the designs with operations and maintenance staff to ensure the farms are accessible and operational;
- Provide guidelines to the contractor regarding staging of works to be completed on site;
- Design robust temporary ESC measures that include quantity management and which require continued use and maintenance after commercial operation of the site if it is not fully re-vegetated;
- Emphasize that permanent SWM and ESC measures are based on a fully vegetated site; and
- Ensure the design takes into account the laydown areas and specifically the fuel tanks and refuelling stations to ensure they are in a location which will is not prone to flooding or ponding runoff.
Construction:
- Develop a spill containment and response plan prior to the start of construction;
- Ensure placement of all temporary SWM and ESC measures prior to any construction; ensure regular maintenance of these measures during construction and through to full re-vegetation of the site;
- Ensure regular site inspections (especially during, or immediately after, storm or rapid thaw events) are completed by a civil engineering consultant to review construction, SWM and ESC measures;
- Ensure additional materials for ESC are on site, especially over winter months;
- Ensure contractor implements staged construction process;
- Minimize the removal of vegetation (and topsoil) prior to construction, especially over winter months;
- Provide sufficient detail on the plans to permit a contractor to construct the farm;
- Minimize construction truck traffic, especially over bare soils; and
- Do not construct during inclement weather or during spring thaw (if possible).
Monitoring:
- The vegetation, stormwater management features and outlets of the sites should be monitored throughout the life of the project;
- If TSS/turbidity monitoring are conducted, ensure that a Contingency Plan is prepared and is implemented, if exceedances of limits are observed;
- At a minimum, bi-annual inspections should be performed and the frequency should be increased if issues arise; and
Owner and Operation and Maintenance staff should contact appropriate consultants in the event that issues arise so that a suitable solution may be developed.
Jason Sharp, P.Eng., Adam O’Connor, P.Eng., and Mark Priddle, P.Geo., are with of McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. For more information, visit: www.mcintoshperry.com.
This article appears in ES&E Magazine’s December 2017 issue.
- TAGS
- stormwater
- drainage
- sediment
- runoff
***********************************************************************************************************
UPLOADED FEBRUARY 24, 2025
Please check out this link!!
https://interestingengineering.com/videos/the-problem-with-solar-energy
FROM DAVID DUNAGAN OF SAVE VAN ZANDT COUNTY
David Dunagan of Save Van Zandt County has posted this on their Facebook page and on their website – see link –
https://savevzcounty.org/2025-legislation
They have updated all of the currently filed bills for this Texas Legislative session related to industrial wind, solar, and batteries.
He stated that each bill now includes links to the actual bill text and they will note the status of each bill once it moves beyond the "filed" status.
He stated that when a bill is assigned to a committee, they will provide separate updates active bills and let people know when hearings will be held.
A client left this article with me. Take a look at it.





David Dunagan from Facebook
Admin of Save Van Zandt County
January 17, 2025
Important Bill Filed!
SB819 was filed yesterday by Senators Kolkhorst, Bettencourt, Campbell, Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, Kiing, Middleton, Parker, and Sparks. It is not a perfect bill, but an important one. This bill needs to make it to committee and needs our input for some minor changes.
This bill is relating to renewable energy generation facilities, authorizing fees:
This bill will require Wind and Solar facilities to apply for a permit from the state. The application requires timely notification to citizens, input from the County Judge, and set standards for setbacks (the setbacks are too low but can be argued in Committee). Additionally real mechanisms must be put into place for approval by the TPW and other agencies and the companies MUST put up decommissioning funds up front. Plus, facilities receiving a permit are not allowed to receive Ch 312 tax abatements.
Again, it's not perfect but making them be more transparent in a timely fashion, put money up, have setbacks, and not get state tax abatements is important.
All updated legislation will be on our website: https://savevzcounty.org/2025-legislation
I have the question as a commenter asked:
Wonder if it would be possible for Senator Bob Hall to amend the bill to include BESS facilities?
************************************************************************
Interesting Article about Growing Solar, Protecting Nature
Mass Audubon coming on part with a reasonable approach; excellent article. If you've not already seen this - worth a read. Wish Texas would do the same.
ANOTHER ARTICLE - News Release ordering Enel to remove wind turbines on Osage Lands in Oklahoma. Enel is the Italian company which has leased a 9 mile stretch of over 3000 acres in Franklin County, Texas to blanket with solar panels and to install two huge BESS Systems; plus working with Oncor to clear 200-wide rights-of-way to transmit the electricity to Dallas. Check this out. Time for court to start finding that these solar panel placements do so much harm; need them stopped. Tell our leaders to say no on any further cooperation with Enel and Oncor in Northeast Texas.
CHECK OUT THIS ARTICLE - KATY CITY COUNCIL REJECTS PROPOSAL TO INSTALL BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY
CHECK OUT THIS ARTICLE!!!
New $4B Panasonic electric vehicle (EV) battery factory in Kansas requires so much power that the facility will need its own COAL plant to run – NaturalNews.com
https://naturalnews.com/2023-09-26-panasonic-ev-factory-kansas-power-coal-plant.html

CONSTRUCTION
SEPTEMBER 2024
Enel (Italy) gets new transmission lines behind Harvey Morris Addition in Mt. Vernon.
Oncor will get tax credits and can charge transmission fees to customers once it hooks up to the Enel lines producing power from solar panels installed on thousands of acres in NE Franklin County. Enel gets our tax dollars in the form of the tax credits it is paid for destroying our land.
Plans are for same acreage AND 4 BESS systems in NW Franklin County. More towers going up. Destroy the trees to cool AI centers and wasteful consumption. Well – that’s greed.
Dallas Morning News and New York Times have both carried articles about solar being so cheap; free from the sun. Heck, by the time coal powered plans build the parts; oil fueled transport gets parts here; and we all suffer. There is a lot of cost to get to the point to take in this “cheap” sunlight. We’ve all paid dearly. Our leaders must step up to stop this madness.
A truck hauling lithium batteries overturned on U.S. Interstate 15 near Baker, California, Friday, causing a battery fire that has blocked the northbound lanes for over a day.
DATA CENTERS DRAINING WATER RESOURCES
Water Use Tied to Renewables…
We have enough concerns over foreign planning for Renewable Energy Development in Franklin County. With solar panels proposed to cover up to 30,000 acres of the 103,000 acres of agricultural land in the county; AND over
1 Million Panels – requiring regular washing to maintain productivity.
With batteries in 5 large installations on 5 to 20 acre sites across the county. The installations – say 50,000 up to 100,000 large lithium ion batteries housed in railcar type containers - linked for DC current and operating at maximum efficiency when cooled. Cooled? Yes, cooled to maintain power in tremendous heat AND to reduce the risk of overheating with an explosion and to fight the fire in a field hosting solar panels (but wait, water and electricity don’t mix)…
And now we get the report that wind and solar energy is particularly reliant on data centers to optimize energy utilization. “These facilities house thousands of servers that require constant cooling to prevent overheating and ensure optimal performance.” The Dallas Morning News, May 6, 2024, reports: “Unfortunately, many data centers rely on water-intensive cooling systems that consume millions of gallons of potable (drinking) water annually. A single data center can consume up to 5 million gallons of drinking water per day, enough to supply thousands of households or farms.” Check for the newspaper article.
Our leaders need to step up now to regulate these facilities before we end up with several of these draining our lake. The residential homes ringing Lake Cypress Springs cover over 46% of the taxes paid to support our Mt. Vernon Schools. If we let the property taxes decline, the residents of the remaining area in the school district pick up the slack. We need to protect the lake, our land, and our lifestyle, and nature as well.
Wind turbines are proposed commencing at Saltillo and going west. We have carbon sequestration at Saltillo. Foreign developers proposing to blanket our landscape with solar panels. Just move on to the new modular nuclear reactors that take up a football field; build several; at least we have left most of the earth alone in this drive to save the earth while destroying the earth.
CHECK OUT THIS ARTICLE IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS FROM 05/06/2024
From The Dallas Morning News:
Data centers are draining resources in water-stressed communities
uploaded 07/02/2024
From the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy:
GETTING CLOSER: Oak Ridge National Laboratory just demonstrated that gallium nitride semiconductors can successfully withstand harsh environments near a nuclear reactor core.
The discovery may make it possible to place electronic components closer to sensors in operating reactors leading to more precise and accurate measurements.
Findings could lead to the use of wireless sensors within nuclear reactors, including advanced small modular and microreactor designs currently under development.
Current sensors are connected to complex circuits that are placed further away from the reactor core to protect the electronics from heat and radiation.
As a result, the data is processed through lengthy cables that can pick up additional noise and signals.
To help shorten the cabling and improve the accuracy and precision of the sensors, ORNL researchers explored the use of gallium nitride, which are commonly used in consumer electronics, as a substitute for silicon-based transistors.
The transistors were able to handle a 100 times higher accumulated dose of radiation than standard silicon devices at a sustained temperature of 125 degrees Celsius—far exceeding the team’s original expectations.
: ORNL
Learn more: https://www.energy.gov/.../national-lab-demonstrates...
uploaded 07/02/2024
There are computer programs that don't use much electricity to run these "mining" operations. We simply cannot afford to allow the growth of Bitcoin Mining; the electric consumption cannot be justified. Sorry. One industry that can be reined in as the demand for electrical energy destroys vast tracts of land through solar and wind spreading across the countryside. Check out this article. About 3 days ago the Dallas Morning News had article about a new data center south of Dallas. I believe that daily electricity use for that center is projected at 300 MW. Now, think on this: the Stockyard Solar project (south portion starting near Harvey-Morris Addition outside of Mt. Vernon) - that project covers well over 2,000 acres and is planned to produce 210 MW (per PUC filings). Then the next phase takes in about 4,000 acres along FM 1896 and produces 345 MW. So - a big hunk of good agricultural land is to be taken to support one data center. Why aren't they just building their own nuclear plant instead of taking our taxpayer funded credits, and letting Enel (Italy) and Oncor (profit making corp.) collect tax benefits and higher rates to install their extractive systems on our land. There has to be a better way than allowing this destruction of the earth. Send that data center natural gas or let them drill geo-thermal. Our commissioners don't need our roads torn up (at our expense to repair) to support the data-center industry.
Bitcoin in the Permian? Data centers test Texas grid. - E&E News by POLITICO (eenews.net)
FOUND THIS VIDEO TODAY - JUNE 13, 2024
https://youtu.be/AcxZRKe4VcQ?si=_J3_f0bajz5s03Nj
and
FOUND THIS ARTICLE TODAY - JUNE 13, 2024
Hail Storm Cripples Solar Panel Facility in Texas
Key Takeaways
In mid-March, a hailstorm outside of Houston crippled an enormous solar plant, breaking panels and leaving local residents concerned about metals leaking into water supplies.
Solar panels are getting larger and their glass is getting thinner to reduce costs, making the panels more fragile.
Solar companies, insurance companies and the government have been investigating whether “hail stow” procedures might reduce expensive damages.
Hail stow involves angling the panels when hail is impending, reducing the direct hit possibilities, but costs the operators revenues as the positioning of the panels loses efficacy.
A “hail proof” solar installation in Nebraska was also destroyed during a hail storm in June 2023.
The geographic area of solar deployment is extending into hail-prone areas, and their dismantlement and waste poses risks to the environment as they can contain cadmium and lead.
A massive hailstorm on March 15 crippled a 3,000-acre solar panel facility 40 miles outside of Houston. The storm shattered hundreds of panels and led nearby residents to worry that toxic chemicals may be leaking out of the panels and endangering local water tables. The hail storm caused solar panel damage to the Fighting Jays Solar facility, a 350-megawatt project brought online in July 2022 and located in Fort Bend County, Texas, which is currently operating at reduced capacity. According to the Department of Energy, hailstones the size of baseballs can possess sufficient kinetic energy to shatter the glass on solar panels completely. The hail ranged in size from quarters to golf balls and even baseballs. The incident points out the perils of trading traditional power sources for vulnerable “green” alternatives and underscores the importance of an “all-of-the-above” approach to energy policy instead of relying on or fully transitioning to renewable energy sources. Because solar panels are largely manufactured in China, China may not be sympathetic to helping U.S. utilities if the electric grid is down due to solar panel problems.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, solar panels contain metals such as lead and cadmium, which are harmful to human health and the environment at high levels. However, in solar cells these metals are found in solid form in a thin film that usually becomes an environmental concern when disposing of them. While some solar panels are considered hazardous waste, others are not, depending on the leachability of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act toxic materials in the solar panel. Denmark-based Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, the parent company of the Fighting Jays Solar project’s developer, AP Solar Holdings, confirmed the storm had taken out much of the farm, but stated there was currently no risk to the nearby community of chemical exposure.
Hail is becoming a major issue for the PV industry as more solar sites are being built in the central part of the United States — a hail-prone region — and modules are moving towards larger panels with thinner glass. To mitigate the damage that hail can cause, moving panels into hail stow is proving effective. Hail stow entails increasing the angle of the panels to a more vertical incline, reducing the likelihood hail will damage panels. Because it requires moving the panels out of the optimal production angle, utilizing hail stow will lead to a loss of revenue. It is estimated that the solar industry is losing $2.5 billion annually from equipment underperformance, likely caused by equipment malfunctions and weather conditions, according to an article in kWh Analytics’ 2023 Solar Risk Assessment.
Last year, GCube Insurance, an underwriter for renewable energy, released a report stating that the solar industry needs to find low-cost solutions due to the escalating frequency and severity of hailstorms, based on data it collected over five years. It reported that hail claims average around $58.4 million per claim and account for 54.21 percent of incurred costs of total solar loss claims being attributable to hail, which creates a gap between the insurance requirements for solar projects and what is available in the market, leading to project delays and cancellations. The report identifies several factors contributing to solar project vulnerability, including inadequate hail risk models, ineffective mitigation strategies, limited and costly insurance coverage, and an uncertain funding landscape. It also highlights how solar manufacturers wanting to reduce costs have introduced larger solar panels with thinner, more fragile glass and have chosen locations more susceptible to hail risk, threatening the financial viability of future projects.
Hail storms are present in the parts of the U.S. undergoing some of the newer solar plant investments, as depicted below.
Source: NOAA
A Nebraska Solar Facility Was demolished Last Year Due to Hail
The solar panels at a 5.2 megawatt solar farm in Scottsbluff, Nebraska, were mostly destroyed by baseball-sized hail moving at 100 to 150 miles per hour at the end of June last year. The solar panels were supposed to be hail-proof, but the size of the hailstones was exceptionally large and high winds that accompanied the hail storm may have driven the large hailstones into the panels, exceeding their hail resistance limits. The hail storm was part of a giant supercell thunderhead that moved across eastern Wyoming and into Nebraska. The multimillion-dollar solar farm consisted of over 14,000 solar panels that had been put into operation in 2019. The system’s 25-year expected lifetime was cut to less than 4 years, leaving a toxic mess to clean up.
The area of the country that runs from eastern Wyoming directly into Scottsbluff is ranked as the highest category for hail risk in America, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The area has some of the highest frequencies of hailstorms in the country, averaging seven to nine hailstorms per year, including hail stones from pea-sized to baseball-sized. Yet, the area is still building solar plants that could be affected as the Scottsbluff solar farm was, driven by federal and state incentives to deploy renewable energy. And, when storms hit, utilities must rely on reliable fossil fuel generators to supply the power that are far less affected by hail.
Conclusion
Solar PV is prone to destruction by hail storms, but solar PV facilities are still being built to meet President Biden’s goal of 80 percent renewable energy generation by 2030 and 100 percent carbon-free electricity five years later and due to lucrative government subsidies. Last year, a massive hail storm destroyed a PV solar facility in Nebraska and this year, one caused major damage to a PV solar facility in Texas, reducing their 25-year operating lives to a handful of years. Solar panels are vulnerable to high-speed hailstorms, despite their stated invulnerability to them. The waste from these solar farms will end up in landfills as recycling is expensive and it is far cheaper to purchase newly manufactured panels. So far, the “energy transition” promising cheap, clean, and green energy is proving to be far from it as toxic waste from these solar panels will pollute landfills as they need to be dismantled and replaced.
SEE MORE ARTICLES BY THIS EXPERT
TAGS
Florida’s Ban on Wind Energy
State-Owned Companies Released the Most Carbon Dioxide Emissions
THE CONTAINER NEWS ARTICLE
Notice from Renewable Energy Systems
A friend has brought me this notice regarding a wind project. We understand this is planned for a stretch of land along south side of I-30 between Saltillo and Weaver. Mighty pretty land; great forests; up for sacrifice!! Quit destroying the earth!

Add comment
Comments
Check this link out.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Check out this link!
Trillions in taxpayer subsidies haven’t made wind and solar power cheaper or better for Americans
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/trillions-in-taxpayer-subsidies-haven-t-made-wind-and-solar-power-cheaper-or-better-for-americans/ar-BB1llpmd?cvid=d6901a5015c04d50bc6c761d3369b885&ocid=socialshare&ei=12
Add comment
Comments
************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Add comment
Comments