Whether you like it or not, solar, as a scaled-up alternative to other forms of commercial energy production, is a huge risk. It’s expensive, intermittent (unreliable), has a significant front and back-end carbon footprint, has a highly toxic manufacturing process, a sketchy and toxic end of life question mark (how, who, cost, disposal, de-manufacturing, danger to people and the environment), the electricity it produces is expensive despite all of that, and it is fragile.
On March 10, an EF-1 tornado (a relatively low-intensity storm) struck Wheatfield, Indiana. It directly hit the “Dunns Bridge I & II” solar projects, destroying a significant portion of the facility. According to Report 24, approximately 2.4 million solar modules were damaged or destroyed. Aerial footage showed rows of panels ripped from the ground and twisted metal frame.
The facility is valued at approximately $1 billion. According to sources, manufacturer warranties often exclude tornado damage, potentially leaving the operator (NIPSCO) or customers with a massive bill for reconstruction, unless the government steps in with a bailout plan.
Report24 highlights the “toxic risks” of the destruction, suggesting that broken panels could leak heavy metals or other hazardous substances into the soil and groundwater.
One little starter tornado trashed all those solar modules in a heartbeat (or two).
Quick Clip from Ch 22 News –watch on ‘Grok Rumble if it doesn’t load in your browser.
And I’m not saying other forms of energy infrastructure aren’t at risk from natural phenomena, but it’s a bit ironic that the angry sky gods needle-scratched a billion-dollar altar meant to protect us from their wrath. What was otherwise (probably) many acres of productive farm land is littered with bits of electronics, polymers, metal, and nasty bits without which it can’t do what little it means to.[Related:MACDONALD: 2.2 Billion Dollar Solar Power Fail Is Closing Down]
“Just the path of the tornado that came through, we have several large solar fields to the east of the town here it went right through the solar field and just ripped a lot of them out,” said Brandon Napier, Chief Deputy of Jasper County Sheriff’s Department.
I am not, by the way – in case you forgot – against residential solar if you pay for it. All of it. The cost of the product, installation, and your vendor’s end-of-life decommissioning plan are built into the pricing. Solar companies oppose efforts to make them address it up front. So it would be up to you, as the environmentally responsible homeowner, to investigate that yourself. An aging rooftop solar system can still be a plus to new buyers if it is warrantied past the sale and kept up and in good condition, but someone still has to deal with the end-of-life complications, especially as age reduces output.
I’m pro-choice on residential rooftop solar, but only if you pay both ends and up the middle, and only if we aren’t forced to buy your power or pay extra for ours because of you. And yes, home insurers increasingly provide coverage in their policies (built in or for short money), but as the WUWT post reminds us, they are fragile and once damaged, dangerous to the environment, and that we live in an age when reliable, affordable energy is necessary and should not be allowed to become a luxury.
