Sign-In  or  Create a Free Account
Sign-in with:
 
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
 
Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

First Major U.S. Solar Project Approved on Tribal Land

Do you like this news?

 
 
11 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 11
June 26, 2012
PV is no more green than coal. During the manufacture and cleaning nitrogen triflouride is emitted, said to be 35 times worse than Co2 emissions. Also, only city people have the misconception that the desert is a useless place. I guess living on concrete, sod and asphalt hide real living organisms, wildlife and man's ecosystems. Oh, no! Bugs. Kill them!
Comment
2 of 11
June 26, 2012
Ever wonder why people immediately go negative when something good happens in renewables? The Moapas get a reliable energy stream and stake in its future. Las Vegas has a ridiculous amount of useless lights on right now and needs all the energy it can get. Further, Ford's Model T came before the Model A (see REW: All-carbon Solar Cell Harnesses Infrared Light). If this setup works, it will offer a lot of relief to a lot of people with a future of increasing energy yields. I partially agree with Sandy though. Seems like noxious emissions ought to be sequestered from all ends of the production cycle however the desert out west has plenty of open space.
Comment
3 of 11
June 26, 2012
I used to work at the silicon plant and no fluorine compounds were used in the manufactory of c-Si. Besides, the removal of part of the solar energy may lead to local beneficial climate change. Some 1000 years ago this area was not as arid as it is presently, so the idea of desert protection is at least arguable.
Comment
4 of 11
June 26, 2012
Sandcanyongal: It's true that solar panels, just like any other manufactured product creates some emissions. It's also true that in the case of solar panels that some of these emissions are potent green house gases. What's NOT true in your statement is that solar panels are, "No more Green than coal". That statement is not true because you have to look at the total emissions over the life cycle of the panel. In the case of solar panels the total life cycle output of greenhouse gas emissions is about 10 times less per kilowatt than producing that power from fossil fuels. That's not to say that efforts to curb GHG emissions from the manufacture of solar panels shouldn't be curtailed as much as possible, but in the REAL WORLD there isn't any comparison. Especially, when you factor in other emissions and pollutants emitted during the mining and burning of coal and other fossil fuels. Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Comment
5 of 11
June 26, 2012
These Moapa people sound smart, but American Indians generally have retarded sustainable energy, especially proposed solar projects.They have cost developers $$ millions. I hope this Nevada project works out.
Comment
6 of 11
June 26, 2012
Have a single one of you read about the infamous Ivanpah experimental project foo-pah. Sustainable in the same sentence as killing massive numbers of birds, interfering with air traffic radar and the nitrogen triflouride greenhouse gases doesn't doesn't hold water. You folks have it all wrong - on a global scale wrong.
Comment
7 of 11
June 27, 2012
freeasthewind. Thanks for the reality check.
Comment
8 of 11
June 27, 2012
Sandcanyongal: little miss information. How about mentioning the little patch of wilderness despoiled by you. In any case, nitrogen trifluoride is not even used in making conventional cells and only occassionaly used to scrub chambers where amorphous silicon is deposited - an issue only for a-Si TF modules. This material and scrubbing byproducts are not released to the atmosphere in the process. I have worked in vertically integrated conventional solar facilities where basically nothing used gets out, not even the water, everything is contained, much of it recycled. Only one process, produced halogen vapors (chlorine) and had double containment - nothing escaped (this is modern industrial hygeine not WW I trench warfare).
Comment
9 of 11
June 27, 2012
There is one single fact, irrespective of where we stand personally. If people don't stand together and quit believing what the profiteers are selling to us we'll continue to loose the rest of the wildlife in the deserts. I've been following desert activity for at least 6 years now. Solar is only one area of attack on desert wildlife. Ft. Irwin has taken many bites of the Mojave Desert tortoises as has BLM, private companies and individual land owners. Ft. Irwin spent millions "translocating" tortoises, removing them during hibernation. When they woke up in a strange place their instincts drove them in a direction toward their original habitats. They we mostly all eaten by ravens and coyotes. This happened twice. They had a duty to be more diligent than that. The same thing has happened on every single encroachment for Ivanpah and all the other "desert" projects in California. My friends, it won't stop until we make it stop.
Comment
10 of 11
June 27, 2012
I don't want to send the link to the redorbit site because it's somehow treated as spamming, but here is the first paragraph to the article I read a few days ago. BERKELEY, Calif., June 4, 2012 /PRNewswire/ — Solar cells do not offset greenhouse gases or curb fossil fuel use in the United States according to a new environmental book, Green Illusions (June 2012, University of Nebraska Press), written by University of California – Berkeley visiting scholar Ozzie Zehner. Green Illusions explains how the solar industry has grown to become one of the leading emitters of hexafluoroethane (C2F6), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These three potent greenhouse gases, used by solar cell fabricators, make carbon dioxide (CO2) seem harmless. Source: redOrbit (http://s.tt/1djK8)
Comment
11 of 11
June 27, 2012
to Wizard12357: Unless someone live near the desert and gets local news you can't comprehend the constant attack on the wildlands. A 109 turbine project was approved last year right in the middle of the California major migratory path and where Calif. condors forage. I personally think they'll be extinct in the next 10 years from the multiple assaults on them. A wetland is being used to water to keep dust down on 14 miles of road and also pumped to a batch plant to make 109 cement pads. It will go down 9 feet or more. This is merely one assault. This isn't only land I was born into, it belongs to all of us to protect. I really expected my portion of the 30% subsidies we are paying would go to technology that had some level of integrity but it's not.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Steve Leone

View Steve Leone's Profile
About: Steve Leone has been a journalist for more than 15 years and has worked for news organizations in Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia and California. more »

Advertise With Us

Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc. ImagineSolar Quick Mount PV American Solar Energy Society Upsolar Rotork plc KACO new energy, Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters