New York State solar farm corruption

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Like what? What is wrong with putting solar on reservoirs?
  • “Contrary to previous assumptions, pollutants such as lead or carcinogenic cadmium can be almost completely washed out of the fragments of solar modules over a period of several months, for example by rainwater.”

Can you tell me who made that statement?
 
So you basically did what I thought just ignored an article about wildlife being displaced by a solar farm because it didn't apply to my first post. There are other examples of live bald eagle nests inside the perimeter of proposed solar farms that are being ignored by state agencies. The same ones who promote conservation (DEC). Guess that doesn't matter though, again.....just birds...
No i did not ignore it. But it also wasn't about a solar farm being placed in those grasslands. It just said if they were it would do this. And if they are taking grasslands I dont agree with it. But most I see are farmland or old industrial land. I did some more looking into the proposed ft Edward solar plan because the article you copied had little info. Yes there was a proposed solar installation that would have taken some grassland. But they have since changed plans. Moved the proposed site off that area and agreed to give money to preserve the grasslands. So are you ok with it now?
 
Last edited:
  • “Contrary to previous assumptions, pollutants such as lead or carcinogenic cadmium can be almost completely washed out of the fragments of solar modules over a period of several months, for example by rainwater.”

Can you tell me who made that statement?
Why dont you tell us. And tell us what panels actually use lead and cadmium
 
Why dont you tell us. And tell us what panels actually use lead and cadmium
That quote was from research scientists with the German Stuttgart Institute for Photovoltaics.

There is a 6300 acre solar farm (almost 2 million panels) being proposed in Virginia. Those panels will contain cadmium.

Only 40% of new US panels use cadmium telluride which is supposedly less toxic. What about the other 60%?
 
Maybe silicon, like mine?

CdTe is not even soluble in water.
 
Oh here's another good one. Since using thousands of acres of farmland for solar farms isn't enough, the braintrust in NY now wants to start implementing floating solar farms. Yup, floating solar farms on reservoirs and lakes. Lovely.
Is this an appropriate place to put a solar farm? Or would you belly ache about that too.


Not too far from my house and I actually worked in that building for about 10 years.
 
I quite do think that roofs (where possible; weight ...) and especially parking lots should be preferentially covered with PV before land that is otherwise used differently (greenish).
Parking lots would be ideal dual usage; keep my car out of the sun, and they're ugly already, adding panels would rarely affect natural or pastural views, so no one would object, even those who think PV looks ugly.
 
Of course it's been altered because it doesnt fit your narrative
No the plan has been altered because that is what the actual plans say. It is smaller and no longer going to be built in grasslands. These are the actual facts. Maybe you should look them up instead of just reading editorials that support your views. And yes that piece was extremely misleading
 
  • Like
Reactions: gthomas785
No the plan has been altered because that is what the actual plans say. It is smaller and no longer going to be built in grasslands. These are the actual facts. Maybe you should look them up instead of just reading editorials that support your views. And yes that piece was extremely misleading

It was an article in the Post, the Post isn't much more factual than the National Enquirer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bholler
Bellyaching because I want to preserve nature, wildlife, farmland, etc?
But you support coal mines. This sounds like any oxymoron to me.

You obviously haven't spent must time in KY or WV and see the devastation that mountain top mining, and various other forms of surface mining have caused to the environment there. Let me guess, it's fake news?
 
This all sounds like NIMBY. I live close to coal country, unless you've seen it you can't understand the impact. I live very close to what used to be a coal fired power plant which has been converted to natural gas luckily. Still have to live with the huge coal ash pile alongside the river that will be monitored forever if it doesn't let go and cause the next coal ash disaster in TN. We already had one that was huge and cost a lot of money and a lot of people's health.
 
But you support coal mines. This sounds like any oxymoron to me.

You obviously haven't spent must time in KY or WV and see the devastation that mountain top mining, and various other forms of surface mining have caused to the environment there. Let me guess, it's fake news?
Or central pa
 
  • Like
Reactions: sloeffle
This all sounds like NIMBY. I live close to coal country, unless you've seen it you can't understand the impact. I live very close to what used to be a coal fired power plant which has been converted to natural gas luckily. Still have to live with the huge coal ash pile alongside the river that will be monitored forever if it doesn't let go and cause the next coal ash disaster in TN. We already had one that was huge and cost a lot of money and a lot of people's health.
We have an old reservoir they filled with coal ash here. Luckily there is no danger of it going anywhere. But costs a lot to treat the run off
 
Seems to be much ado over little, drummed up by a cheezy rag paid by the fossil fuel industry. The concern seems to be mostly about the view being affected. The environmental harm is minimal, especially balanced against the alternatives.
 
This was all farm land. Why are farmers seeing this as more profitable than farming? It’s not like this is new farmland either. The overall environmental impact will be extremely positive. Our current agricultural practices are not very environmentally friendly.

Flat treeless ground is often farm land. Farming has always been volatile economically. Guaranteed income can’t be passed up.
I think We should be covering parking lots with solar before we take up productive lands where ever possible.
If there were only enough parking lots and a cheap solar installation method was available. Our ag policy is really falling behind the times.
Wonder how much runoff from the dairy farm is affecting the lake? Is that also being brought up?
The runoff from the actual farm is and I have no data just a hunch less than the runoff of the agricultural land need to feed the herd.

We just got back from Switzerland. Water quality is not huge issue because they have not embraced industrial scale ag. They run on 98% renewable energy! Subsidize the crap out of agricultural and gasp don’t have socialized medicine. A latte in Lucern was $15….
 
We have an old reservoir they filled with coal ash here. Luckily there is no danger of it going anywhere. But costs a lot to treat the run off
The leaching of the hazardous materials into the groundwater is a problem.
Here's an article about what we had here in TN and that was 18 years ago. We have coal ash dumps on rivers that are being used for drinking water for towns, a real disaster in the making.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bholler
Recent post from Ms. Fasulo who is fighting tooth and nail against the NY solar and wind corruption:

"The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation has allowed Boralex and ORES to leave out of its environmental (what isn’t redacted) reports that Fort Edward Solar will border one of the most important migratory corridors, the Hudson River, in the Northeast.
Do you know what 500 acres of solar panels look like to birds of prey from above?
This phenomen has been documented. It’s called the lake effect. Large solar arrays reflect horizontal polarized light, which is the main visual cue animals and birds, like ospreys, use to identify water.
The bird will then dive down into the panels below them, colliding with the panels and most often, dying.
Dragonflies, mayflies, and other aquatic insects (that the DEC used to pretend to care about protecting) have been documented mistaking the panels for water as well.
By siting Fort Edward Solar next to the Hudson River, where many mated pairs of osprey live, the location of this complex threatens their lives - and so many waterfowl species that rely on the Hudson River to live, survive, and travel.
I documented this osprey a few days ago. They are incredible-looking birds. They deserve the freedom to migrate, hunt, and raise their babies without mistaking an ecological detention center as a body of water. "
See less