Xref: utzoo sci.environment:9119 sci.electronics:16596
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!olivea!oliveb!veritas!amdcad!brahms!phil
From: phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: solar cells
Message-ID: <1991Jan2.015259.23492@amd.com>
Date: 2 Jan 91 01:52:59 GMT
References: <1990Dec17.190857.16559@engin.umich.edu> <1990Dec28.210436.10601@zoo.toronto.edu> <18584@teda.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc; Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 22

In article <18584@teda.UUCP> dll@teda.UUCP (Dan Liddell) writes:
|>(1) SOLAR CELLS ARE EXPENSIVE TO MAKE AND DON'T LAST FOREVER.  (ALSO, THE
|>	PRODUCTION PROCESSES ARE NOT PARTICULARLY "CLEAN" AND THE MORE
|>	ADVANCED CELLS ARE OFTEN HAZARDOUS WASTES WHEN THEY ARE RETIRED.)
|
|OPINION:Silicon solar cells do not represent much of a disposal
|problem, at least not because of the silicon. They are probably good

Henry was probably thinking of Galium Arsenide. Arsenic is generally
considered a haz mat.

|>(4) LARGE-SCALE SOLAR POWER SERIOUSLY CHANGES THE HEAT BALANCE OF THE
|>	SURROUNDING AREA, SO IT IS NOT COMPLETELY CLEAN.  
|
|Life systems are open systems. Nothing is completely clean.

Spoken like a person who's scared of math, and doesn't accept that
often, a large enough quantitative change is a qualitative change.
Not the kind I want running national policy.

--
Whatever happened to Global Warming? Could we have some Local Warming?