Solar Power

T.C.

Bronze Member
May 17, 2012
2,417
3,797
Kalamity Falls, Orygun
Detector(s) used
Whites M6
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
This Solar Plant Accidentally Incinerates Up to 6,000 Birds a Year
JOSH HRALA15 SEPTEMBER 2016
A rare and unusual type of solar power plant that concentrates sunlight in California is accidentally killing up to 6,000 birds every year, with staff reporting that the birds keep flying into its concentrated beams of sunlight, and spontaneously bursting into flames.


The problem has been going on since the site opened in 2014, and the team says it's trying everything to save the birds from a fiery fate. But so far, the perfect solution has eluded them.

"We're doing everything we can to reduce the number of birds killed out here," the plant's spokesman, David Knox, told Louis Sahagun at the LA Times. "If there's a silver bullet out there, maybe we'll find it."

The sight of a bird being fried to death is so common at the Ivanpah Solar Plant in California's Mojave Desert, that workers have nicknamed the smouldering birds "streamers", because they leave tiny wisps of white smoke behind as they burn up in the sky.

So why is this happening?

Well, it's mainly due to the plant's overall design and location. Unlike typical solar farms that use photovoltaic panels on a large scale, the site at Ivanpah is built on entirely different principles. To catch sunlight, the plant uses 5 square miles (12.9 square kilometres) of giant mirrors that focus beams of concentrated sunlight onto three different 40-storey-tall towers.


Once the beams are focused on the towers, their energy can be used to power turbines inside, which generates energy for the power grid.

The problem is that all this concentrated light around the towers makes them a prime location for insects to hang around, and this attracts the birds. When the birds cross in front of all that concentrated light to get at the insects, they burn up in seconds.

And the situation is made even worse by the fact that the plant sits along the Pacific Flyway - a popular migratory route for many different types of birds, including protected species like varied thrushes and northern goshawks.

According to Sahagun, federal biologists estimate that upwards of 6,000 birds perish at the plant every year, and even though officials at the facility say they're trying to come up with a solution, little has changed since its launch in 2014.

"Ivanpah is a bird sink - and [a] cautionary tale unfolding on public lands," Garry George from Audubon California - a conservation group that focuses on the Pacific Flyway - told the LA Times. "It continues to operate as though there's an endless supply of birds to burn."

To make matters worse, some of the deterrent systems in place to keep other animals out of the facility have caused unforeseen repercussions. The plant installed a large fence to keep out endangered desert tortoises, but the knock-on effect is that this has made it way easier for coyotes to kill roadrunners.

The good news for the roadrunners is that the Ivanpah team says it plans on adding 'roadrunner doors' to the fences so they can easily hop through, instead of getting trapped.

Birds in the sky, on the other hand, are a little more complicated, because how do you stop a bird from flying wherever it wants?

With no easy solution in sight, the US Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal agencies are stepping in to collaborate on potential solutions.

"It may take another nine months of data to determine what is actually going on at Ivanpah in terms of bird mortalities and the effectiveness of various deterrents," deputy chief of the US Fish and Wildlife Service's migratory bird program, Amedee Bricky, told the LA Times.

"Eventually, we hope to transport what we learn to nations around the world developing their own solar energy programs."

What makes this problem stand out - besides the large number of deaths - is that it shows that even solar power plants, which are supposed to be beneficial for the environment, can still have unforeseen impacts on local ecosystems.

Hopefully, with so many teams now working on the problem, a solution will soon present itself.

Until then, it's not looking too great for birds along the Pacific Flyway.

Editor's note (9 September 2019): Coverage of the Ivanpah bird problem has contributed to the unfounded misconception that solar panels may kill birds. We have clarified this article to explain how the solar thermal plant differs from the far more common design used in photovoltaic solar farms.

Solar power, ain't it great!
 

Birds, plants or fish. Every source of energy destroys something.

Entropy is a harsh mistress.
 

Actually solar & wind are not always the best way to go for renewable energy. The amount of diesel used to make & transport these energy plants is enormous. Solar fields are ugly and tie up thousands of acres of land formerly rural countryside. The materials used to make solar panels has to be mined using heavy equipment, very harsh on the environment too. Wind turbines kill millions of birds, are ugly and have a relatively short lifespan as do solar panels. What do you do with 80 foot rotor blades after they are shot? They bury them. Thermal & ocean wave s are a constant source but not being utilized. Wind dies & it gets dark every night. Wind & solar are basically a "feel good" energy source to make people think they are saving the environment. The US has an enormous amount of natural gas, it has issues in its extraction but burns very clean. Nothings perfect.
 

Maybe we will get lucky and Pelosi will try to fly her broom through this area!
 

6,000 birds incinerated a year!? That's a lot of wasted birds....

Hmm, if we converted those 6,000 birds to bio-diesel, how many gallons would we get?

Windmils kill a lot of birds too. If we pile all them birds into the boiler you could squeeze a little more electricity out of those windmills. The wind turbines still wouldn't pay for themselves, but at least the birds would be "recycled".
 

I think the greenies just hate the oil companioes so bad they will put up with fact that none of this green stuff works worth a crap. All got to be subsidized by the taxpayers. Sure, some corporate farms get rich off the ethanol subsidies but we really don't even need it now. Of couirse we will as soon as all the new regulations take effect. It's not that I am against clean energy, but at what cost? I read somewhere the amount of energy needed to produce a solar cell is more than it will ever produce in it's lifetime. Just B.S. to force people to accept and pay for this. And tons more coming soon. In the meantime China continues to pollute many times more than the few percent we are restricting. And Al Gore is a billionare but his house uses fifty times more energy than a normal house. And John Kerry flies his private jet which pollutes forty times more than the commercial airlines. And don't forget Obama's friends took hundreds of millions for nothing. It's all a BIG SCAM.
 

Last edited:
Don't get me wrong, I love solar stuff. Built many solar projects. If you live in the backwoods it is cheaper to go solar then to run powerlines to your property. And many places in the world when they use wood fires for cooking, a solar cooker is the way to go. Some places they have to walk miles to find firewood and it is damaging the countryside. You can build one from materials as cheap as carboard and aluminim foil and they really do work quite well. It you put the container in an oven roasting bag like they use for cooking turkey it will do much better on cold or windy days. You wouldn't think a chicken can come out browned but it does.

This is the one I built. Reflective mylar works a little better than aluminum foil.

Double-Angled-Twelve-Sided Solar Cooker

There are several here: Plans for Solar Cookers -- The Solar Cooking Archive
 

Last edited:
I agree with both your posts. Small scale solar on homes is great. They have used it for years. Large scale solar & wind is a joke. I read where all the energy it takes to build & transport then erect 1 windmill it can spin for years and never produce what it used to get started.
 

I agree with both your posts. Small scale solar on homes is great. They have used it for years. Large scale solar & wind is a joke. I read where all the energy it takes to build & transport then erect 1 windmill it can spin for years and never produce what it used to get started.


It's even worse than that. When you figure in maintance and the fact that the blades have a limited lifespan you would be far better off money wise building a coal fired plant. Also there is shadow pollution. If you try to live in the shadow of a windmill, the sunlight keeps blinking on and off. It's enough to drive a strong man to strong drink. I think the windmill generator is just a hole in the budget to provide jobs for cronies using other people's money.

 

Taxpayer's money to fund the billionaires. There is no savings in energy or pollution but the rich politicians and their buddies make off like bandits. A bunch of propaganda for the ignorant. Now the Green New crap is going to break our economy. America produces goods cleaner than China but we are going to give away our industries back to them because of all the regulations. Doesn't save the climate or our economy. Total scam and the politicans get rich off it.
 

I agree with both your posts. Small scale solar on homes is great. They have used it for years. Large scale solar & wind is a joke. I read where all the energy it takes to build & transport then erect 1 windmill it can spin for years and never produce what it used to get started.

Even a homes alignment can help heating and cooling costs.
Masonry can absorb heat during many winter days to be released at night , or shaded in summer.
If ground temp transfers into that same masonry it can reduce temps.
Plenty can be done to grab heat , or reduce absorption on a simple scale.

As always , conserving energy beats creating more if it's manmade.

Had a coal fired plant I used to fish around put out of commission.
I'd have rather seen better scrubbers on it's exhaust/discharge.
It was partially converted to natural gas. But the writing was on the wall as far as it being a target.

Small scale individual home systems could be more efficient based on locale. And of course can be co-oped if there is a surplus.
A portion of a water run/run of river/streaming can be diverted and returned without raising the temp or polluting it. In such a manner a small turbine can be operated.
We run water in our homes. Can not the discharge turn a simple turbine? What about rain run off and snow melt?
In a pocket where wind is viable , and that can be limited in scope , a small windpowered generator can run.
Battery banks are an issue for many items. Building and recycling them ect. have to be considered.

Price point. Amortization/return on investment , simplicity ect. all need to be presented to homeowners/renters in a logical manner.
I don't see much of that going on.

One thing that might help is free sourcing simple plans for proven effective heat grabbers. Kept simple.
Cooling on the opposite extreme can be as simple as particular shading. From awnings or deciduous trees that let sun through in winter.
 

There is a guy down the road trying to capture methane from his dairy cows to make electricity. I don't think he knew what he was getting into. Now he has all the problems of both a dairy farm AND an electric company. But gooberment gave him other people's money to spend, so he took it. Now he wishes he could give it back. Can't be done.

But the biggest problem with "alternative energy" is that it is being force upon us. Solar and wind can work great so long as it is voluntary. They used wind to power ships for thousands of years before mechanical propellers came along, and wood fired stoves are really burning power supplied from air, soil, and sunlight.

I really wonder why they call it "alternative energy" though. Those that demand it's use don't seem to allow alternatives.
 

I read somewhere the amount of energy needed to produce a solar cell is more than it will ever produce in it's lifetime.

You must have read that article a long time ago... that hasn't been true for at least a decade and the panels in operation now will produce much more electricity to payback those of the past. With the lifespan of today's panels and reductions in manufacture and waste, solar panels will create much more energy than it took to produce them.

There's enough hot air in this thread to power a city though. Even the article quoted by the OP has misinformation. The mirrors for the Ivanpah facility (3 units) are less than 1 sq. mile, not 5 sq. miles. It has been estimated to kill a bunch of birds though...

I do wonder how many of the posters on here have an interest in the fossil fuels industry. I seriously can't understand the outright hostility that some people express towards changing our lifestyle to conserve biodiversity, mitigate the effects of climate change, and make the planet cleaner place to live.

Whatever... Y'all can keep spouting misinformation and keep on hatin'. I'll keep picking up litter to keep plastic out of the oceans and my solar panels and Powerwall 2 will be installed in a couple of weeks.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck
 

Last edited:
Kantukeean, I'm not against conservation. I'm just against having other people's idea of conservation forced upon me. Some of these "alterantive energy" pushers are simply O.P.M. addicts. They are high on Other People's Money.

And if you think I am the one being hateful, you can just shove it.

Edited to add, you can do whatever you like with your money. I'll do the same, thank you.
 

Last edited:
Granted, in some places, solar and/or wind don't make sense. However, where solar makes sense, it is a much better option than coal or NG.

One argument against solar that previously held true was that it was a negative return on investment. With the substantial reduction in the price of panels over the past couple of decades though, there is now a positive ROI, albeit a long one, but with the lifespan of today's panels and current electricity rates (at least in my area), I should see a positive return on my investment after 17-18 years, and that includes the cost of the battery and assumes no price increase/kWh. I highly doubt that there will not be any price increases in electricity rates over the next 17 years though, which will reduce the number of years until I see a positive return on the investment. We didn't decide to go solar strictly from a financial standpoint though. The environmental benefits played a much larger role in our decision making.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck
 

You must have read that article a long time ago... that hasn't been true for at least a decade and the panels in operation now will produce much more electricity to payback those of the past. With the lifespan of today's panels and reductions in manufacture and waste, solar panels will create much more energy than it took to produce them.

There's enough hot air in this thread to power a city though. Even the article quoted by the OP has misinformation. The mirrors for the Ivanpah facility (3 units) are less than 1 sq. mile, not 5 sq. miles. It has been estimated to kill a bunch of birds though...

I do wonder how many of the posters on here have an interest in the fossil fuels industry. I seriously can't understand the outright hostility that some people express towards changing our lifestyle to conserve biodiversity, mitigate the effects of climate change, and make the planet cleaner place to live.

Whatever... Y'all can keep spouting misinformation and keep on hatin'. I'll keep picking up litter to keep plastic out of the oceans and my solar panels and Powerwall 2 will be installed in a couple of weeks.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck
I do sincerely hope you are correct. Please do not denigrate posters who have heard/read an alternate
reality. Simply prove your statements. I have not found anything on any site that shows that solar or wind will ever be a major player in our country's energy needs. We have totally turned our backs to nuclear power as well. That is an entire other discussion. I don't understand what your reference to plastic pollution has to do with this discussion although it does merit a solution. Putting solar on your home is smart and no one has argued against that. 17 yrs?
Will it really save you money?
 

Last edited:
neighbors down the road had a solar system installed.
I have not looked it all over. But will get updates over time.
Not a good month for a demo lately , but they were doin fine last summer.

Sure seems to beat panels out in a field and transferring it to a distant point of consumption with attendant loss due to run and cost.
 

Kantukeean, I'm not against conservation. I'm just against having other people's idea of conservation forced upon me. Some of these "alterantive energy" pushers are simply O.P.M. addicts. They are high on Other People's Money.

And if you think I am the one being hateful, you can just shove it.

Edited to add, you can do whatever you like with your money. I'll do the same, thank you.

I wasn't referring to anything in your posts. I've just been through these same tired arguments with some of the same posters in another forum here on TNet (before it got moved or deleted because some folks kept bringing God and politics into what should be strictly scientific and economic arguments).

By all means, do as you please with your money.

One thing to remember though is something that the fossil fuel defenders never mention... and that is the entire true costs of fossil fuels, which are enormous when you include the effects of increased GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and climate change (e.g. millions who will be displaced by sea level rise, increased incidence of disease, etc. etc. Many of which we're already beginning to pay for...).

Kindest regards,
Kantuck
 

Last edited:

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top