Solar energy: better than fossil fuels, worse than anything else.
It is true that most of the impact is caused by the resource depletion -- solar panels use silver, which is quite scarce material. Hopefully, newer technologies will be able to alleviate this problem.
However, even if we discount the resource depletion part of the solar energy impact, our conclusion remain valid. Pollution caused by production process of silicon wafers used in solar panels is significantly higher than the pollution caused by wind power (and orders of magnitude less than pollution from fossil fuels).
| Electricity, from coal Impact: 885.48 | Electricity, from solar panels Impact: 47.78 | Electricity, from wind Impact: 8.55 | Electricity, hydro Impact: 0.49 |
If you are concerned with environment then, demand hydroelectric power. If not possible, then wind. If not that, solar, and only then settle for anything else.


Comments
1 comment postedYeah I do agree with your article. Solar, wind and fossil fuels need to access transmission lines to get their source of power to households and businesses. Those industries share the risk of accident from electrical current traveling through power lines.Australia's second biggest electricity and gas retailer, has acquired Wind Power, more than tripling its potential wind capacity to benefit from regulations supporting renewable energy. Along with existing sites and options, the purchase increases Origin's prospective capaase IncreaseDeveloping all the projects may cost as much. Brazil, long proud of its push to develop renewable energy and wean itself off oil, has a bad case of fossil-fuel fever. An enormous offshore field in territorial waters — the biggest Western Hemisphere oil discovery in 30 years. As President Barack Obama embraced renewable energy in his inaugural speech Tuesday, Clipper Windpower laid off 90 employees - about 11% of its workforce - as the global financial crisis throws a spanner in the once-booming wind industry.