Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Sabin 33 #2 - Are toxic heavy metals from solar panels posing a threat to human health?

Posted on 12 November 2024 by BaerbelW

On November 1, 2024 we announced the publication of 33 rebuttals based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Below is the blog post version of rebuttal #2 based on Sabin's report.

Fact-Myth box

Roughly 40% of new solar panels in the United States and 5% of new solar panels in the world contain cadmium1, but this cadmium is in the form of cadmium telluride, which is non-volatile, non-soluble in water, and has 1/100th the toxicity of free cadmium2. Most solar panels, like many electronics, contain small amounts of lead3. However, the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DER) has assessed that “because PV panel materials are enclosed, and don’t mix with water or vaporize into the air, there is little, if any, risk of chemical releases to the environment during normal use.”4 The Massachusetts DER has further assessed that, even in the unlikely event of panel breakage, releases of chemicals used in solar panels are “not a concern.”

All materials in a solar panel are “insoluble and non-volatile at ambient conditions,” and “don’t mix with water or vaporize into air.” Moreover, they are encased in tempered glass that not only withstands high temperatures, but is also strong enough to pass hail tests and is regularly installed in Arctic and Antarctic conditions. It is theoretically possible that, when exposed to extremely high heat exceeding that of a typical residential fire, panels “could emit vapors and particulates from PV panel components to the air.” But that risk is limited by the fact that “the silicon and other chemicals that comprise the solar panel would likely bind to the glass that covers the PV cells and be retained there.” When a cadmium telluride panel is exposed to fire of an intensity sufficient to melt the glass on the panel, “over 99.9% of the cadmium [is encapsulated in] the molten glass.” Furthermore, a 2013 analysis found that, even in the worst-case scenarios of earthquakes, fires, and floods, “it is unlikely that the [cadmium] concentrations in air and sea water will exceed the environmental regulation values.”5

One peer-reviewed study in the Journal of Natural Resources and Development (A. Robinson & Meindl 2019) found it unlikely for lead or cadmium to leach into the soil from functional solar panels. Measuring heavy metal concentrations in the soil at various distances, researchers found no significant differences in lead or cadmium concentrations directly underneath solar panels, compared to soil 45 or 100 feet away. The study further found that “lead and cadmium were not elevated in soils near PV systems and were far below levels considered to be an imminent or future danger to environmental health.”6

Although the study did find higher levels of selenium in soil directly underneath solar panels, the study noted that the presence of selenium was possibly a “result of the cement used in construction,” rather than leaching from the panels themselves. In addition, the study noted that even the highest selenium concentrations observed were below the EPA’s risk threshold for mammals. Finally, the study noted that fly ash, a product of coal combustion “commonly disposed of in landfills and as a soil amendment in agriculture,” contains significantly higher concentrations of lead (40x), cadmium (1.1x) and selenium (4x) than the soil samples taken directly underneath the solar panels in the study area.


Footnotes:

[1] Polycrystalline Thin-Film Research: Cadmium Telluride, Nat’l Renewable Energy Laboratory, May 2022 and Taking Cadmium Telluride Technology to the Next Level, US-MAC (last visited March 25, 2024).

[2] Health and Safety Impacts of Solar Photovoltaics, NC Clean Energy Technology Center, May 2017

[3] Mark Hutchins, The weekend read: A lead-free future for solar PV, PV Magazine, Oct. 26, 2019

[4] Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources et al., Questions & Answers: Ground-Mounted Solar Photovoltaic Systems, 10-11 (Jun. 2015)

[5] Yasunari Matsuno, Environmental risk assessment of CdTe PV systems to be considered under catastrophic events in Japan, First Solar, Dec. 1, 2013

[6] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Soil Screening Level (2018), (last updated May 3, 2023)

Skeptical Science sincerely appreciates Sabin Center's generosity in collaborating with us to make this information available as widely as possible.

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 2:

  1. I've notice the right wing propaganda machine is quite keen on aerial photos of hail damaged solar farms. This contradicts the claim above that solar panels are hail proof. Is there any reliable surveys of installed panel robustness? Repairability of hail damaged panels?

    0 0
  2. LazyTeenager:

    How carefully did you read the post?

    Searching this page for "hail" finds four hits: three of them in your comment. The fourth hit is in the body of the article, where it says "Moreover, they are encased in tempered glass that not only withstands high temperatures, but is also strong enough to pass hail tests..."

    How did you translate that to "hail proof"? Are the web sites you are looking at trying to claim that the solar panel industry is advertising that solar panels are indestructible?

    A simple Google search for "solar panel hail damage resistance" finds a series of web pages that include statements such as "...can withstand most hail storms...". In addition, numerous web pages talk about how installation and solar panel type can improve hail resistance.

    ...and I even see web pages that mention various testing standards, for example:

    "According to IEC 61215 standard, a PV module should resist at the minimum to the impact of a hailstone of 25 mm launched at 80 km/h, while the Swiss VKF standard demands a minimum of 30 mm, practically making it 40 mm or more."

    ...and one page that lists "8 ways to protect your solar panels from hail storm damage". Number 1 is:

    Buy Panels Rated UL 61730, UIC 61730, or IP68

    The first step to protecting solar panels in a hailstorm is to buy resilient panels. The materials that go into a solar panel’s manufacture determine its durability.

    While most panels produced today are relatively tough, panels rated UL 61730 go through testing to withstand strikes of hail between one and three inches, traveling at speeds up to 88.3 miles per hour (142 kph). Purchasing panels that meet this certification level can protect your solar array in almost any storm.

    So, the OP that states "strong enough to pass hail tests" clearly does not mean that solar panels are indestructible. If a particular installation has been done with poorer quality materials or methods, or a hail storm that is worse than expected and tested for, then damage will happen.

    Choosing a less expensive panel or installation means taking more risk. Pictures of damage solar panels indicates that people took more risk that they realized, or didn't properly assess the risk - or simply lost the bet on whether the risk would happen to them.

    So, the answers to your questions are readily available. The OP does not claim that solar panels will never get damaged, so photos of hail-damaged  solar panels is not a contradiction.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us