<story><title>If Solar Panels Are So Clean, Why Do They Produce So Much Toxic Waste?</title><url>https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/23/if-solar-panels-are-so-clean-why-do-they-produce-so-much-toxic-waste/#2a1c244a121c</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>CptFribble</author><text>When you consider the whole life cycle start to finish, nuclear power is the second safest in terms of deaths per terawatt-hour produced, only following hydroelectric power. That also includes every nuclear disaster ever.&lt;p&gt;Solar energy is great, we need more of it, and I think the long-term future of power includes a microwave transmission solar station at one of the Lagrange points.&lt;p&gt;However, when you look at the total externalities, nuclear is actually the safest and cleanest form of power that we could use in the medium term.&lt;p&gt;Except that everyone is afraid of it, and no one wants to spend the money.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jnordt</author><text>True - however if you consider the true lifecycle from start to end (including construction costs, and decomissioning) nuclear is one of the most expensive power sources.&lt;p&gt;The costs for proper decomissioning of a nuclear plant and safe storage of the used materials are excluded in most analysis, as the time and cost horizon is so large.&lt;p&gt;On Solar Panels: there are some very interesting projects by large environmental service providers underway that use high pressure water or very high temperatures, to separate the glass from metal frame.&lt;p&gt;I think a similar hurdle are carbon fibres, you can&amp;#x27;t burn or shred them (carcinogenic micro fibres).&lt;p&gt;There are some interesting projects that try to  clean and reuse the fibres through some kind of chemical baths..but most of the old e.g. wind turbines are just stored at a giant wind turbine graveyard right know.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s a fascinating field!</text></comment>
<story><title>If Solar Panels Are So Clean, Why Do They Produce So Much Toxic Waste?</title><url>https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/23/if-solar-panels-are-so-clean-why-do-they-produce-so-much-toxic-waste/#2a1c244a121c</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>CptFribble</author><text>When you consider the whole life cycle start to finish, nuclear power is the second safest in terms of deaths per terawatt-hour produced, only following hydroelectric power. That also includes every nuclear disaster ever.&lt;p&gt;Solar energy is great, we need more of it, and I think the long-term future of power includes a microwave transmission solar station at one of the Lagrange points.&lt;p&gt;However, when you look at the total externalities, nuclear is actually the safest and cleanest form of power that we could use in the medium term.&lt;p&gt;Except that everyone is afraid of it, and no one wants to spend the money.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>starbeast</author><text>Globally, hydro is three times as risky as rooftop solar, there were ~171,000 dead from the Banquio Dam failure alone - &lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nuceng.ca&amp;#x2F;refer&amp;#x2F;risk&amp;#x2F;risk.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nuceng.ca&amp;#x2F;refer&amp;#x2F;risk&amp;#x2F;risk.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, I keep seeing figures for rooftop solar and not solar in general, and the risk for rooftop solar is due to the risk of working on a roof. If solar was mandated in new build and major roof repair, wherever it made sense to install it, this risk can be greatly reduced as the largest risk is during putting the scaffolding up and taking it down again.</text></comment>