Photos Of Apple's Massive Solar Farm

If they put grass in between the solar panels it might not actually be that bad.
 
Methadras said:
There are more trees in this country now then when we first settled here. I'm sure it's not that big of an issue.
Click to expand...

Actually the statistics say that we have more trees than we did 100 years before the surveys taken in 1997. We have been on an upward trend, but it also unfortunately has the side effect of replacing older trees with newer younger trees in the same area, or essentially cutting down a forest for alternative uses (such as the use in this article) and creating newer younger one in another area. Both of which ruin habitats for animals and insects, many of which will not recover from the damage done.
 
Ducman69 said:
Oh and just to give an idea of how completely insignificant solar output is for its cost and land use
Click to expand...

I have 12 panels on my roof that basically makes my electrical usage zero during the summer months... yeah completely insignificant considering the land it's using *sarcasm**rolly eyes**pooping*
 
errmm not to play the devil's advocate or anything, but the best efficiency panels are ~25% on a good day and it takes more energy to produce them (counting mineral extraction, tranporation, assembly, etc) than they will ever produce in a reasonable lifetime. Ironically it would have been "greener" if they just stuck to nuclear power
 
The more large companies spend on solar power installations the cheaper it gets. So it's all good in the long run.
 
I will never understand why people invest so much money into solar. It's far to expensive, and nowhere near enough efficient to be worth the effort right now. Besides that it requires a massive amount of land to gather the energy needed to power anything big. In 10 years solar may be something to look into, if people aren't buying home based hydrogen generators or some other cool technology comes along.
 
Ducman69 said:
How so? Coal is the most abundant domestically readily available power source, it is currently the most cost effective means of producing power, the emissions with the exception of very high CO2 output are absolutely excellent since the advent of "clean coal" plants with essentially no pollution of nearby water sources or chemicals released into the atmosphere (particulates and sulfur and the like are all captured thanks to syngas and other processes... you don't actually burn coal anymore), and with new carbon-sequestration designs that are already implemented in three large plants here in Texas even the CO2 output is a non-issue.

And the output of a coal plant (many are well over 3000 megawatts) is actually significant to meeting the power needs of the nation, unlike that giant solar array that couldn't even power a small town.
Click to expand...

someone smart enough to type up something so coherent should also be smart enough to figure out that if it were that good and easy we wouldn't need other sources of power.

coal is cheap and the supply is basically unlimited. if things were as rosey as you say there would be no energy concerns ever again. but we know that's not true. so there's something wrong with your very coherent statement.
 
cthulhuiscool said:
errmm not to play the devil's advocate or anything, but the best efficiency panels are ~25% on a good day and it takes more energy to produce them (counting mineral extraction, tranporation, assembly, etc) than they will ever produce in a reasonable lifetime. Ironically it would have been "greener" if they just stuck to nuclear power
Click to expand...

Man, the misinformation that some people continue to cling to is just amazing. But then again I'm sure there are still people who believe that a Prius is dirtier than a Hummer all because it has a few NiMH batteries...
 
sfsuphysics said:
I have 12 panels on my roof that basically makes my electrical usage zero during the summer months... yeah completely insignificant considering the land it's using *sarcasm**rolly eyes**pooping*
Click to expand...
During the summer months, my AC runs at night. Oh, and btw, you are welcome. Glad my tax dollars were able to help you with your project.
 
bAMtan2 said:
someone smart enough to type up something so coherent should also be smart enough to figure out that if it were that good and easy we wouldn't need other sources of power.
Click to expand...
Clean coal is a somewhat recent development, and carbon sequestration is absolutely new and basically in alpha testing (out of hundreds of plants I only know of three).

And it is so good and easy though, which is why coal powers almost as much as every alternative power source COMBINED.

And what is another great power source that we also have in great domestic supply? Natural gas, and yup, it is the second most prolific power source and together coal and natural gas power virtually the entire country.

The remaining less than a third is handled by nuclear and a little bit of hydro power from dams.

Coal, gas, nuclear, and hydro power are not subsidized, and solar power is HIGHLY subsidized. Despite this, it accounts for less than 1% of the total power output on our grid. Yes, less than 1% despite all your tax dollars behind it trying to prop it up and make it a viable technology.

Now I'm not biased against solar, I'm just biased towards common sense over "feel-good" legislation. Solar power is convenient in some applications. I'd enjoy having a solar panel on my roof to drive a fan to ventilate air in the cabin when parked outside, so its not 150oF when you first get in. I have eight solar lights in the front of my house and five solar lights in the back of my house for lighting up my garden because it was more convenient than laying a bunch of wires. Its great for camping or to have a light for your barn or other remote location. Great... but lets be realistic about the limitations and cost effectiveness of it versus superior technologies.
 
Hey Ducman69, I have a couple questions for you about "clean coal"
1) Where do the byproducts go? you did know there are still some very nasty byproducts that need to be disposed of right?
2) How many clean coal plants are there? How many regular coal plants are there? hint: not very many, and many.
 
That is awesome. I wish more companies would invest in this. I think the point is that it's green. We need to stop thinking about only money. We need to start thinking more about the environment. Coal is so 1800's, it's time to completely stop throwing mercury, sulphur and other hazardous pollution into our air.

Though I think wind would be more cost effective than solar, though. Wind is also less maintenance too, no need to go take the snow off every morning when it's winter.
 
darkstarcow said:
Hey Ducman69, I have a couple questions for you about "clean coal"
1) Where do the byproducts go? you did know there are still some very nasty byproducts that need to be disposed of right?
2) How many clean coal plants are there? How many regular coal plants are there? hint: not very many, and many.
Click to expand...

I absolutely plan on installing solar panels on my first home to be as independent from the grid as possible. Natural disasters still happen, and if a plant, lines, transformers, etc... go down, I want to still have power.
 
Ducman69 said:
If its a really old plant and for some reason the state hasn't updated it and installed scrubbers and the like, OK, the tall stack actually is spitting out bad stuff... and that's why its tall, it gets dispersed high into the atmosphere thanks to stronger air currents that pick it up.

But the new clean-coal plants that use gasification, its nonsensical to worry about the stacks since its mostly just steam from the steam turbine.

Same thing with nuclear plants, people see the big steam stacks and think its outputting tons of pollution when its just a cooling tower and carries no radiation or anything... water vapor, relax! :D
Click to expand...

thermal pollution ;)
 
Red Squirrel said:
I think the point is that it's green. We need to stop thinking about only money. We need to start thinking more about the environment. Coal is so 1800's, it's time to completely stop throwing mercury, sulphur and other hazardous pollution into our air.
Click to expand...
And yes, you are the reason for the solar farm.

Its a "feel good" marketing gimmick to make Apple look green, and appeal to people like yourself that look at solar and think its "teh futurez", and everyone else is so 1800s.

If they really wanted to help the environment, they would follow Dell's example and change their packaging (the smaller bamboo packaging is smart and effective), and concentrate on recycling programs for their equipment and reduce the use of mercury, sulphur, and other hazardous pollution into the ground water of third world dumping grounds were old Macbooks, iPhones, and iPads go when they die.
 
Ducman69 said:
Coal, gas, nuclear, and hydro power are not subsidized, and solar power is HIGHLY subsidized. Despite this, it accounts for less than 1% of the total power output on our grid. Yes, less than 1% despite all your tax dollars behind it trying to prop it up and make it a viable technology.
Click to expand...

Lots of things start at 0% and move up over time.
 
darkstarcow said:
I absolutely plan on installing solar panels on my first home to be as independent from the grid as possible. Natural disasters still happen, and if a plant, lines, transformers, etc... go down, I want to still have power.
Click to expand...
That demonstrates ignorance of the limitations of the technology versus alternatives if that is your reasoning.

In the case of a natural disaster or other power interruption, you need reliable power. You can't get that from solar, as you won't get output at night, you won't get peak output for most of the day, and you probably don't want to invest in a huge battery grid (especially if you are pretending its to help the environment), even if for some reason you didn't mind flushing benjamins down the toilet.

It'd be like relying on wind power for power backup, its output will vary and at times be zero, and it can in fact be near zero for very extended periods of time (if its unusually still). Reminds me of a Simpson's episode... :D

If you are smart, you'll do what I did, buy yourself a reliable gasoline generator. Mine is from Yamaha (Honda also makes great ones), and it runs on autogas. Stock up during hurricane season on gas, and pour what you don't need into your cars after (and visa versa you can siphon you car's gas). An electrician can install an appropriate plug for you so it'll hook right into your home's electrical system cheaply (cost me $150).

You can also go with a natural gas generator, although these are a bit more expensive. In the event of an earthquake where both the electrical power and your gas line may be interrupted, some can be run off of propane tanks as backups.
 
Ducman69 said:
That demonstrates ignorance of the limitations of the technology versus alternatives if that is your reasoning.

In the case of a natural disaster or other power interruption, you need reliable power. You can't get that from solar, as you won't get output at night, you won't get peak output for most of the day, and you probably don't want to invest in a huge battery grid (especially if you are pretending its to help the environment), even if for some reason you didn't mind flushing benjamins down the toilet.

It'd be like relying on wind power for power backup, its output will vary and at times be zero, and it can in fact be near zero for very extended periods of time (if its unusually still). Reminds me of a Simpson's episode... :D

If you are smart, you'll do what I did, buy yourself a reliable gasoline generator. Mine is from Yamaha (Honda also makes great ones), and it runs on autogas. Stock up during hurricane season on gas, and pour what you don't need into your cars after (and visa versa you can siphon you car's gas). An electrician can install an appropriate plug for you so it'll hook right into your home's electrical system cheaply (cost me $150).

You can also go with a natural gas generator, although these are a bit more expensive. In the event of an earthquake where both the electrical power and your gas line may be interrupted, some can be run off of propane tanks as backups.
Click to expand...

I think you're making the mistake in thinking that some of us rely 100% on solar panels. It supplements the power we get from our utility companies and helps reduce the bills by a lot.

It has nothing to do with being a backup power source in case the entire town lose power.
 
Ducman69 said:
That demonstrates ignorance of the limitations of the technology versus alternatives if that is your reasoning.

In the case of a natural disaster or other power interruption, you need reliable power. You can't get that from solar, as you won't get output at night, you won't get peak output for most of the day, and you probably don't want to invest in a huge battery grid (especially if you are pretending its to help the environment), even if for some reason you didn't mind flushing benjamins down the toilet.

It'd be like relying on wind power for power backup, its output will vary and at times be zero, and it can in fact be near zero for very extended periods of time (if its unusually still). Reminds me of a Simpson's episode... :D

If you are smart, you'll do what I did, buy yourself a reliable gasoline generator. Mine is from Yamaha (Honda also makes great ones), and it runs on autogas. Stock up during hurricane season on gas, and pour what you don't need into your cars after (and visa versa you can siphon you car's gas). An electrician can install an appropriate plug for you so it'll hook right into your home's electrical system cheaply (cost me $150).

You can also go with a natural gas generator, although these are a bit more expensive. In the event of an earthquake where both the electrical power and your gas line may be interrupted, some can be run off of propane tanks as backups.
Click to expand...

Generators can break and not give you power too.

Solar power, even if it only gives you power during the day, is better than no power at all. Also, solar panels will reduce energy costs on an on-going basis over time instead of just sitting around like an unused generator that shouldn't run because it costs money in gas.

It does take a long time for solar panels to pay for themselves, but they really don't need much attention or anything to do their thing and they do it constantly. There's a few local companies in Seattle (yup, rainy gloomy Seattle) that are seeing cost benefits in using solar power on top of their buildings despite the weather around here.
 
Ducman69 said:
I'd rather have one of those surrounded by lush forests, than have 2000 acres plowed flat into a wasteland to equal the same power ouput.
Click to expand...

LOL @ surrounded by forest.

Here is where I grew up.

https://www.google.com/maps?q=77506...&t=h&hnear=Pasadena,+Texas+77506&z=14&iwloc=A

Pasadena, TX... DO you see any forest there. The city has the nick name stinkadena for a reason.


now i live in Plano, north of Dallas and I sure do not miss those refineries.

https://www.google.com/maps?q=75024...39,0.132093&t=h&hnear=Plano,+Texas+75024&z=15
 
What a waste of space! Especially for something that isn't very efficient today. If they want to reduce their environmental impact, how about planting tress in the area instead.
 
Ashbringer said:
Moving up like to 50% efficiency.
Click to expand...

Yup, which is a good thing, but I was actually talking to Ducky about something else becuase he was all like:

Ducky: "Oh my gawd! Only like a teeny little bit of the total power is totally generated by solar panels."

And I was like:

Me: "No wai? Are you serious?"

And he was like:

Ducky: "For really! It's like less than 1% of all power generated."

And I was like:

Me: "Whatevar! Everything has to start at 0% and it'll be like waaay up from 1% eventually."
 
Ducman69 said:
I'd rather have one of those surrounded by lush forests, than have 2000 acres plowed flat into a wasteland to equal the same power ouput.
Click to expand...

You've obviously never lived near a coal plant before, therefore your opinion is about as useless as Helen Keller. Try having to use a fan to circulate air through your apartment because the soot killed your HVAC and then your computer dies from soot building up inside the case. Then you won't be so ignorant.
 
Ducman69 said:
And yes, you are the reason for the solar farm.

Its a "feel good" marketing gimmick to make Apple look green, and appeal to people like yourself that look at solar and think its "teh futurez", and everyone else is so 1800s.

If they really wanted to help the environment, they would follow Dell's example and change their packaging (the smaller bamboo packaging is smart and effective), and concentrate on recycling programs for their equipment and reduce the use of mercury, sulphur, and other hazardous pollution into the ground water of third world dumping grounds were old Macbooks, iPhones, and iPads go when they die.
Click to expand...

Oh no doubt about it there's a lot more they could do, on top of that, but at least it's something.

But yeah what I'd really like to see from lot of companies is simpler packaging. There's no need to use so much plastic and stuff when they could use just cardboard or bamboo (sounds like an awesome idea to me) and also having better recycling programs. Especially with the nature of apple users to dump a product in the trash the minute a new one comes out. The ewaste generated is unreal.
 
Lots of Apple product owners resell their stuff or take advantage of buyback programs for discounts. It's not really fair to assume they're all super wasteful people who drive around in huge SUVs and gigantic pickup trucks hitting peoples pets or something. :(
 
Ducman69 said:
That demonstrates ignorance of the limitations of the technology versus alternatives if that is your reasoning.

In the case of a natural disaster or other power interruption, you need reliable power. You can't get that from solar, as you won't get output at night, you won't get peak output for most of the day, and you probably don't want to invest in a huge battery grid (especially if you are pretending its to help the environment), even if for some reason you didn't mind flushing benjamins down the toilet.

It'd be like relying on wind power for power backup, its output will vary and at times be zero, and it can in fact be near zero for very extended periods of time (if its unusually still). Reminds me of a Simpson's episode... :D
Click to expand...

For solar and wind you pretty much need a string or two of batteries, that's a given. the only time you don't need batteries is if you are selling directly to the grid. If you have a proper setup the only thing the batteries should be generating is a very tiny amount of hydrogen, and they should last for many years to come. Especially if you use telco style cells that are rated for like 10+ years. You need to maintain them too, add distilled water, and possibly acid.

Another thing you can do with a battery bank is charge it off peak, and run off it on peak. A decent way to save a bit of money in hydro. :D Though I'd have to sit down one day and figure out how long the batteries would pay for themselves. It's just something that has crossed my mind at one point.
 
Dethred said:
You've obviously never lived near a coal plant before, therefore your opinion is about as useless as Helen Keller.
Click to expand...
It is amazing how much people know about me from my anonymous online alias... but sadly this time you're wrong.

Please, take two seconds of your time and actually read more than one post from me in this thread, then do a google search about what the byproducts of clean-coal plants are. Its chemically impossible to get soot as you describe from the exhaust stack for example, as the pulverized coal is gasified and the syngas goes through various scrubbers.

Yes, a lot of CO2 is produced, but as was said that too can be captured and compressed and either just pumped underground under layers of clay, into saltwater aquifers, or even used by the oil industry so that it cannot enter the atmosphere, whatever happens to work for the conditions in the area. Now if its a forty year old plant, modernizing with scrubbers and what not has probably already been done by now, but they may not be able to do anything with the carbon dioxide... but that's hardly something that is going to make you choke, and maybe, just maybe, it will help prevent the encroaching ice age. :D
 
I think it's cool. I'd love to see the day when solar becomes practical for all.
 
I wonder if the dollars saved in power bills cover the taxes on that stretch of property???
 
Ducman69 said:
It is amazing how much people know about me from my anonymous online alias... but sadly this time you're wrong.

Please, take two seconds of your time and actually read more than one post from me in this thread, then do a google search about what the byproducts of clean-coal plants are. Its chemically impossible to get soot as you describe from the exhaust stack for example, as the pulverized coal is gasified and the syngas goes through various scrubbers.

Yes, a lot of CO2 is produced, but as was said that too can be captured and compressed and either just pumped underground under layers of clay, into saltwater aquifers, or even used by the oil industry so that it cannot enter the atmosphere, whatever happens to work for the conditions in the area. Now if its a forty year old plant, modernizing with scrubbers and what not has probably already been done by now, but they may not be able to do anything with the carbon dioxide... but that's hardly something that is going to make you choke, and maybe, just maybe, it will help prevent the encroaching ice age. :D
Click to expand...

Oh OK, so you're sticking with if they had built a state of the art Coal power plant (if that is even a legitimate way of describing coal.

So you're sounding great in your descriptions on how clean this new "Clean Coal" technology is, but please tell me... does coal fall out of the sky as photons? If not, how do we acquire this wonderfully clean material to burn?

Here's a nice pie, let me place it squarely on your face:

mountaintop20removal-jj-001.jpg
 
Ducman69 said:
...and maybe, just maybe, it will help prevent the encroaching ice age. :D
Click to expand...

And not to be too serious, but I take that as confirmation that you support political agendas above decades of scientific research and the consensus of the entire independent field of climate science. Please don't make a fool of yourself and dispute this.

When I want to know what's going on with a cancerous skin growth, I head on down to the local Pub to get the Bartender's professional opinion and maybe a bit of surgery. See, we're not so different after all, we know exactly who to go to for the best information on a subject!

(Not to mention that there is a finite amount of carbon-based fuels on earth. As they become progressively more difficult to acquire, it is the height of stupidity to imply that we should continue to exploit them to the same or greater degrees.)
 
josephunh said:
Wait so they cut down all the tree's to put in that??? Not sure thats helping.
Click to expand...

My first thought as well. Talk about "green"... Funny how people and corps. are twisting words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top