Can lead seep out of solar panels? What about other heavy metals? And if they can, is it enough to poison a whole river? And can the very idea of this poison a whole community’s attitude to a proposed solar project?
These questions don’t typically take up much time in solar project planning applications, because the answers to the first three questions (only under extreme conditions, no, and no respectively) usually get in the way.
But when these issues were raised by a water agency in eastern Victoria in correspondence about a solar project and battery, it provide to be catnip to local opponents and conservative media – even though the agency involved has withdrawn its concerns.
The Goulburn-Murray Water agency raised the issue in a letter dated 29 August about the 332 megawatt (MW) Meadow Creek solar project and its accompanying 250 MW, four hour battery. The letter’s contents were reported by The Australian and the North-East Farmer, and other local newspapers.
“The information provided outlines that the solar panels have trace amounts of lead in the solder of the panel modules,” the North-East Farmer reported the letter as saying.
“It is further noted that there is potential for chemical leaching of heavy metals from the panels.
“Consideration should therefore be given to the proposed number and concentration of the panels on the site and the potential cumulative risks associated with their ongoing operation.”
The letter was sent in at the tail end of the state planning process and reportedly included the heavy metals hand grenade.
Meadow Creek, in the fertile King Valley region south of Wangaratta, was approved under the state’s fast track process in October.
The water agency declined to share this letter with Renew Economy, but pointed out that once it received “adequate information” from the project developers it withdrew any objections.
“The proponent’s submission identified that appropriate types of materials would be used for the construction of the solar panels,” a Goulburn-Murray Water spokesperson said.
But two months before the agency expressed its concerns, the Meadow Creek proponents had already put out a lengthy response to community questions explicitly saying it won’t be using “obsolete” panels that contain cadmium telluride.
Lead is not even mentioned as a component in that document, nor the planning assessment or the final planning permit.
Should you be worried? No
But one late query raising already-debunked issues opens the door to another question: are these issues valid?
Rong Deng is an expert in solar panel waste, and she says no, they are not valid.
Deng is a lecturer at the School of Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy Engineering at the University of New South Wales (NSW), and a major part of her work has been identifying what goes into solar panels – and urging governments to reuse those materials.
“I think there are a few misconceptions behind some of the public concerns,” she told Renew Economy.
“Firstly, 90 per cent or more of the solar panels used in Australia do contain lead in the solder. But solar panels are built as a fully encapsulated, laminated structure – the solder cannot escape the encapsulated structure.
“In normal operating conditions, meaning an intact panel sitting on a roof or field generating electricity, lead cannot leach into air, soil, or water. Also important is that solid metallic lead is not hazardous; only dissolved lead ions in water pose a risk.”
She says there are three scenarios where lead leaching might, theoretically, be possible: if the panels are damaged by a combination of fire followed by acid rain; severe breakage; or fragmentation in landfill when panels are crushed or shredded before disposal and are also subject to acidic fermentation.
Deng says panels are rarely left unattended long enough after a fire for acid rain to cause leaching, likewise, badly broken panels.
And in landfill intact panels are not a problem. Panels that have been shredded beforehand, a practice normally done during recycling rather than dumping, or crushed is what people should be concerned about.
As for cadmium telluride, it’s old fashioned technology that’s in less than 5 per cent of Australia’s installed panels because installers use silicon-based modules.
What does international research say?
But what if there is a fire followed by acid rain, or a smashed up solar panel is left in situ for months or years, or shredded panels are left in a landfill?
The International Energy Agency (IEA) offers a deeper dive into just how big the health risks are for people who encounter fire, breakage, or badly disposed of panels.
In a series of reports called Human Health Risk Assessment Methods for PV, IEA testing found that if a person was downwind from a small, medium or large fire and breathed in lead or cadmium for 10 mins, the risk of cancer is still less than one in a million.
If these are washed into soil or water reservoirs by water used to put out the fire, exposure concentrations are still below risk-based screening levels, it said.
For breakages, the report uses a hypothetical example where rainfall leaches lead or cadmium from a broken rooftop panel and the runoff ends up in soil or groundwater, then ran real world tests by submerged panels in water for different timeframes.
The result was that soil, dust, and groundwater recordings of lead and cadmium from broken rooftop or large scale solar panels “are orders of magnitude below US EPA health screening values”.
The final report took a worst case example of a landfill – one it noted is illegal in many countries including Australia – and still found the risk of lead and cadmium leachate to human health to be negligible.
A worst case landfill is one that doesn’t collect leachates, has no groundwater monitoring or stormwater monitoring, never installed liners to stop leachates from migrating, and left badly broken or shredded panels uncovered.
To top it off, the IEA testing also factored in organic or acid fermentation, something it says is unusual in landfills which are more likely to be neutral or alkaline.
As for Meadow Creek, it’s now waiting on federal environmental approvals for both the solar and battery projects but is starting work on detailed management and construction plans.
But the battle to get through to development approval has taken its toll on the community, as locals involved with the Meadow Creek Agricultural Community Action Group remain opposed to the project.
Support this year from energy infrastructure czar Tony Mahar and local MP Helen Haines, who are worried about the long term effect of communities arrayed against renewable energy developers, has failed to bring about a rapprochement — even the Wangaratta mayor remains staunchly opposed.
It means that while the proponents have fulfilled the letter of the regulatory process, they’ve got a long way to go to convince neighbours the project can peacefully coexist with agriculture and water resources.
If you wish to support independent media, and accurate information, please consider making a one off donation or becoming a regular supporter of Renew Economy. Please click here. Your support is invaluable
Rachel Williamson
Rachel Williamson is a science and business journalist, who focuses on climate change-related health and environmental issues.
Share this:
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
Print