The Economist continues the debate: Trees Vs. Solar
by Sami Grover, Carrboro, NC, USA on 05. 3.07
Some time ago, a TreeHugger reader sparked quite a debate about whether to clear trees so they could install solar panels on their roof. Now The Economist is discussing a similar issue, when one of their reporters discovered that you need sun if you are going to install solar panels. Apparently they found this out the hard way, after trying to have solar panels installed, but being told that their house was too wooded.
“The problem was perhaps blindingly obvious. It turns out that to install solar panels, you must have enough sun.”
This information isn’t as useless as it first sounds - one solar specialist quoted in the article explains that 10-20% of potential customers he visits turn out to have inappropriate sites:
“Greens by definition like trees, he notes; the downside is that trees block sunlight. ‘I literally have had people ask me to install solar on the north side of a 150-foot hill, in a small clearing between trees. They might get three to four hours of sunlight a day,’”
Of course, the trees also offer the house shade, thus reducing energy costs in the summer (not to mention wildlife habitat and aesthetic considerations). And the author’s suggestion of positioning panels in a neighboring field was quickly shot down, as the copper wire and trench work needed to run the power to the house would be prohibitively expensive. In the end, the reporter was advised to forget about solar, and invest in “an energy-efficient refrigerator, fluorescent light bulbs and other conservation-minded items” instead. So while we applaud the increased interest in solar power, we have to recognize that solar isn’t for everyone. As the article suggests, “a sunny disposition does help”! ::The Economist::
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- 1,280 Megawatt Solar Power Plan Unveiled by Los Angeles Mayor
- Geoengineering Redux: Fertilizing Trees with Nitrogen to Fight Climate Change
- Anti-Reflective Solar Panel Coating Absorbs 96% of Sunlight, Called Photovoltaic ‘Game Changer’ by Developer
- Let There Be Solar Panels...And There Were: Vatican Completes Rooftop Solar Array
Hmmm... Solar panels need the sun. Sounds crazy, but it just might work. *writes that down*
If you're interested in supporting a fledgling industry, then buy a solar panel. If you're interested in saving as much energy as possible, then research other options.
People forget that rooftop solar is still a very inefficient way to achieve CO2 reductions. You can almost always spend your $5000 in much more effective ways, like insulated glazing, more insulation, or more efficient appliances/heating installations.
People generally don't think of a solar panel and a new, more efficient fridge as substituable commodities, but they are...
Seems to me that the efficacy of solar won't really take off until people can sell energy back to the grid. When that happens a person on a south-facing slope could "subsidise" his north-facing neighbor.
In Ohio if you have an efficient enough system you can sell energy back to the energy companies. Co-Ops do not like that quite as much. Thus Guerrilla Solar. People who's agreements with a Co-Op do not allow energy to be fed back into the grid and certainly not for money.
You should improve your insulation and decrease your load before focusing on solar panels.
One of the quckest payback payback items you can buy is a tankless hot water heater. They are made in both electric and gas models, and will by far outlive a normal tank style hot water heater. Sometimes these are known as "on demand" hot water heaters. Make sure you get one appropriately sized and suited for your use.
The second quickest payback is solar hot water heater, and they also work very well with the tankless hot water heater, since it mostly relegates the tankless hot water heater to backup only duty the majority of the time.
When people think solar, they think solar photovaltaic, but it's very much worth thinking solar hot water first, and then solar photovoltaic.
:)
We should have something like the carbon offsets program for solar, where you could buy solar panels for a house in Arizona or Texas (Trees covering a roof? What? Trees grow taller than a house?). Then you get the cost savings and everyone gets to feel warm and fuzzy. that might be a pretty decent plan...
Hi,
Solar water heater or tankless water heater. We can't say which is better simply. In some areas at some time, solar heater is better and other conditions, the tanless water heater is better.
So we produce these two heaters. We hope people could use these heaters together. Then all time is better.
Arthur Huang