The environment! It is the only thing that anyone wants to talk about these days. That and Brexit. There is real concern about global warming, rising sea levels and air pollution. So in a mad panic, everyone is going electric. Not any old electric though. Electricity generated by fossil fuels is bad. So this has to be clean, renewable energy. And where does that come from? Hydro, solar, tidal, wind and the like. So every valley is being flooded, every stream harnessed, every hillside covered in wind turbines, and all the bits in between covered over by photovoltaic solar cells. Hurrah! We are going to rescue the planet. We won’t need those filthy coal and gas power stations. The oil giants can take a running jump. We can dump our dirty diesel vehicles, drive our battery powered cars, switch to LED lighting, salve our consciences and feel very smug. That, at least, is what we are told to do and we readily obey because it seems like the right thing to do. But is it? On digging deeper, it seems that this alternative reality is somewhat disturbing and that putative renewable solutions do not necessarily mean renewable and will not necessarily bring salvation to our beleaguered planet. Deep in our hearts we know that the only sustainable motoring is walking and we really do know that jet-setting is awfully bad. But we’re not so keen on saving our home that we'll swap Goa for Bognor Regis, so we pollute it in different ways and let another generation deal with the consequences.
This is not an article that sets out to prove or disprove anything. It is to highlight that there is an alternative narrative and that the populist bandwagon itself has consequences that we may not all have considered. Here are a few things to consider.
PV Cells
The main ingredient of a photovoltaic (pv) solar cell is silicon (Si). Although this is super-abundant in the earth’s crust, usually in the form of sand and quartzite crystals, it is rarely found in pure form. Pure silicon is required for pv cells and so it has to be processed. The raw material is heated to 1,800°C to produce 96-98% pure metallugical silicon. It is then re-heated (Siemens process) to produce electronic grade silicon rods which will be of 99.999…% purity depending on their intended use. These then need to be doped and crystallized. Silicon is a group IV element having four outer electrons. All the silicon atoms form themselves into a diamond-like crystalline structure, each atom having four covalent bonds, one each with four neighbours.
This silicon needs to be doped with either i) a group III acceptor such as boron, gallium, indium or aluminium: an element with just three outer electrons. This leaves holes in the structure and is known as n-type silicon, or ii) is doped with a group V donor such as phosphorus, arsenic or antimony. This leaves spare electrons lying around and is known as p-type silicon. The silicon is heated to 1,425°C and a small quantity of dopant is added. Using the Czochralski process, a seeded crystal is grown into an ingot of either p or n-type silicon. The ingots are sliced into the wafers that will form the substrate, and these are heated to 1,000°C in an atmosphere of oxygen in order to grow a protective silicon dioxide coating. Holes are etched into this surface using an acid such as hydrochloric or hydrofluoric. The wafers are again heated, this time in an atmosphere of the other dopant and this allows boron atoms, for example, to diffuse some way into the substrate. At the limit of diffusion a pn junction is naturally formed.
At the pn junction, with electrons moving from the p to the n-type silicon, a voltage is produced of about 0.6V. When a photon of sunlight strikes the silicon, one of the spare electrons is dislodged and the voltage potential moves it toward a metallic collector plate. Once there, it flows into copper wires and behaves as any other electrical current. The cells are assembled into a suitably sized panel, sealed and mounted in an aluminium frame.
The above is a typical process. Different manufacturers may have variations on this theme and the process is subject to development and improvement so this is not a definitive statement. Nevertheless, even a casual overview such as this should ring alarm bells. The silicon is heated five times. That takes a lot of energy. The use of poisons and acid does not seem very eco-friendly. The process has been in use for decades in the electronics industry. Although microchips are manufactured by the million, they are by definition, tiny. Thousands of transistors can be made on a single 300mm wafer. Solar cells are massive by comparison. Hundreds of wafers are needed to produce one solar panel. Quite how much appears to be open to great variation. A typical pv panel generates 250 Watts – four needed to produce 1 kWh. Figures seen suggest anything from 4kg to 16kg of silicon per kWh. Whichever figure reflects reality is irrelevant – substantial amounts of raw material has to be processed and this requires huge amount of energy. Some of the dopants are poisonous (arsenic), some on the endangered list (phosphorus – only 50 years’ supply left according to one source), some (all?) destructive to the environment to extract (gallium is found in bauxite). Acid is used for etching and washing and needs to be disposed. ‘Western’ producers are legally required to dispose of this toxic waste in a sustainable manner, whatever that means. Far Eastern producers have been known to dump it in a local river!
The framing, as noted, is generally made of aluminium. This is produced from Bauxite and lots more electricity. Bauxite is usually found just below the surface and so is strip-mined, mostly in tropical countries such as Australia, China, Guinea, Brazil and India. The overburden is stripped away and then, using explosives where necessary, huge machines dig and scrape and haul. When complete the overburden is returned, as if that makes the devastation acceptable. There! That’s environmentally friendly.
Then we must consider the location of manufacture. The pv industry has its roots in the ‘western’ world. Most solar panels were produced in USA, Europe and Japan where legislation is tight and quality control good. Since 2008 there has been a dramatic fall in the costs and price of solar panels. The propaganda attributes this to improved processes and scales of production. However it uncannily mirrors a move to the Far East where about 90% of panels are now produced, 70% in China alone. It has been a source of complaint that many Chinese products are inferior. So it seems that the cost reduction has more to do with cheap labour, poor quality control and the dumping of toxic waste into water sources, and less to do with any process improvement.
It gets worse. China’s electricity is generated predominantly by fossil fuels – coal! And they are still building more, but not necessarily in China. Gas produces less pollution but it seems that a huge amount of methane is released into the atmosphere in extracting, preparing and transporting the stuff. Regardless, the world has gone solar panel crazy. They are being churned out by the millions, and all the while a vast amount of CO2 is pouring into the atmosphere in the process. Once again, the PR guys jump up and tell us that it’s a hit today for a cleaner tomorrow. Really? These things have a lifespan. As yet that is still an unknown variable. Most manufacturers give a 20 – 30 year guarantee that their panels will still be producing 75 or 80% of their initial output. They may go on for many more decades with a slow and linear decline in output. Or will their output suddenly fall off the cliff edge? In either case, will the diminishing returns mean that it makes economic sense to simply replace those aging panels? If so, production will likely never subside.
Then we address the issue of disposal. We will be told that they can be recycled and yet we will find them being dismantled by small children in Bangladesh or leaching toxic waste into landfill sites in Liberia. Why? Unless a profit can be made by recycling the panels it will not happen – regardless of any consequences.
Solar panels require sun in order to effectively produce electricity - lots of it! This is called insolation. Here in gloomy Scotland they are pretty ineffective. The world’s most densely covered country is Germany where the climate is also less than ideal. It is recognised that if panels could be manufactured using solar energy and used in areas of high insolation (Spain, the high Alps, etc.), the case could be made for their real value. But as we have seen European-made panels are too expensive and that highlights another problem. One of the major attractions of covering one’s roof in solar panels has little to do with saving the planet and much to do with reducing one’s electricity bill. The shorter the pay-back period the sooner the savings kick in and if that means the purchase of cheaper Chinese-made panels, then so be it!
Rechargeable Batteries
Unless you are going to plonk your solar panels in the Sahara there are going to be many hours of non-generation due to cloud cover. Then when the sun goes down and you want to turn on the lights – well, you can see the drawback, even in the Sahara. So ideally there needs to be a way of storing the electricity for use at these times. The obvious answer is a battery and lo! that is exactly what are being produced in increasing numbers. The most common ones are made from lithium and are known as Li-ion batteries. They come in every size and shape, from tiny coin-shaped examples through to the massive battery banks being constructed by Elon Musk.
This is great! We can generate and store our electricity during the day and use it whenever we need it and tell the power distribution companies to push off. We don’t need to accept their rip-off ‘standard variable rate’ tariffs or waste our lives trying to understand and compare a mind-numbing array of so-called deals. Oh, the joy!
And yet there is a long way to go. Lithium production is, unsurprisingly, damaging to the environment. It is mainly produced from brine which is pumped from underground aquifers and left to evaporate in the sun. This poisons the location of manufacture. The brine itself is finite. Other materials used include copper, cobalt and manganese which are extracted from the earth's crust in a destructive process called mining. But that traditionally happens in Congo and we don't generally see the consequences because it is a third-world country in a state of permanent civil war. Out of sight, out of mind! Indeed, such is the demand for cobalt that the technology has been designed to mine it from beneath the ocean beds, with unknown consequences. Another environment to destroy in a quest to save the environment! It is Australia and Argentina where lithium is mainly produced and those countries are in a completely different hemisphere. Anyway, Australia is mostly empty, sparsely inhabited by convicts and by aboriginal tribes who can only worry about not offending lumps of sacred rock!
Lithium is currently not commercially viable to recycle. One figure suggested that the derived value is about one third of the cost of extraction. On the other hand, batteries that are used to power energy-hungry devices like cars, for instance, can be repackaged for less critical applications such as storage. But even so, regardless of how the industry develops, the raw materials are not renewable and the whole process is being driven by commercialism, that in turn is driven by greed.
Rare Earth Elements
These are the lanthanides plus scandium and yttrium. All of them are less rare than their name suggests. Gold, for example, is considerably rarer than the rarest of these. Nevertheless the problem is that none of them occur in sizable deposits and the world's biggest producer is China. REEs are needed for all electronic devices, which have a short lifespan, and are usually thrown away. They are used in magnets for turbines, batteries, TVs, defence equipment, weapons, optics and a whole range of products. Once again, we find that non-renewable resources are being used as part of a 'renewable' future. Whilst on the subject of turbines, a news story currently running is that of EDF and its plans to build a Fife off-shore wind farm. There are manufacturing facilities along the Fife coast – Methil, Kirkcaldy, etc. From where are the turbines to be sourced? Indonesia!
Cars
With governments around the world banning and outlawing the production of fossil-powered vehicles there is going to be a massive increase in the use of alternatively powered cars – and a massive infrastructure project to keep them going. At the moment, relatively few cars are purely battery powered. Most are hybrids – vehicles that have batteries and a conventional engine to charge the batteries on the go and power the vehicle entirely when required. With the demonisation of diesel these are predominantly fueled by petrol. Diesel particulates are not great but neither is the CO2 produced by petrol engines – and the equivalent petrol engine consumes up to 50% more fuel than its diesel counterpart. One vehicle I showed an interest in has batteries that can power it for up to 30 miles, according to the hype, although in reality this is likely to be less than 20, especially in the winter when lights and heaters are all in full use. A 2.4 litre petrol engine charges the batteries and, at motorway speeds, takes over completely delivering not many more than 30 miles per gallon. The batteries have an eight-year guarantee. Then what happens? Once they have come to the end of their life, will it be economical to replace them or will the entire vehicle be scrapped?
So how do I conclude this piece? There is a genuine concern about the way humanity is raping and pillaging its home yet relatively few people are willing to change their lifestyles to help. Swapping a diesel-powered car for a hybrid is not a lifestyle change. It is jumping on a bandwagon. It is wanting to be seen to do the right thing whilst not actually doing the right thing. It is hypocrisy - moralising. British Airways gets criticised for 'tanking' yet it is the travelling public that keeps them in the air in the first place. Yet, do we not all fill up when passing the supermarket filling station, knowing that their fuel is 10p per litre cheaper than at our local garage? It's the same thing. Why the price difference? It is not the extra transportation cost. That is negligible. It is because they can. Have you ever wondered about the innumerable lorries traveling nose to tail on every m'way, emblazoned with slogans that include words like 'sustainable', 'eco', 'green', whilst churning out the diesel particulates in order to deliver stuff we don't need, sourced from the far side of the planet?
We don't need to travel the world. Yes, it's fun but if it threatens our existence, is it that important? When I was young all children were assigned to attend the local school by the Council. We either walked or went on the bus. The 'school run' hadn't been invented. Yet the holy grail of 'choice' and 'competition' and performance tables has created a twice-daily melee of parents delivering their progeny to distant locations to leverage some perceived competitive advantage whilst filling their lungs with poison. Presumably it makes sense somewhere! I could go on, but what's the point? No one is listening.
Students of the Bible know better. They are aware of verses that explain how the earth is designed to last forever, how humans will live forever upon it and how God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth. This is just as well. Humans are unwilling and unable to care for their own home. But no one listens to that either. They find different ways of destroying it whilst telling us they are saving it.
Further reading:
Electronics, Crecraft, Gorham, Sparks
Jonathan Gornall, Asia Today 9th Oct 2019
Christina Nunez, National Geographic 11th Nov 2014
Kris de Decker, Low Tech Magazine
Joey Gardiner, The Guardian 10th Aug 2017
Hobart King, geology.com
Back