White Paper Assignment Brainstorm: David, Anahita, Robert, A ✓ Solved

White Paper Assignment Brainstorm David, Anahita, Robert, As

White Paper Assignment Brainstorm David, Anahita, Robert, Assia TOPIC: Current downsides of solar panel energy and why we should/shouldn't use them

FRONT MATTER: ROBERT

INTRODUCTION: ANAHITA

- Introduce the basics of solar panels

- Talk about energy distribution

- Reason for report

- Why we need solar power

- Brief history of solar panels

- Brief summary/overview of dilemmas

- What to do with old cells

- Should we use higher output cells or more eco-friendly ones?

- Issues with people leaving the grid

- Distribution issues with solar panels

BACKGROUND: ASSIA

- Historic perspective

- Discuss different types of solar cells (output vs recyclability): Quantum dot photovoltaic, Organic photovoltaic, Dye-sensitized, Perovskite, Silicon

- Development of solar power

- Benefits of solar power

- Recycling issues (1st dilemma)

- Potential dangers/cons of solar systems

- Energy distribution (2nd dilemma)

DISCUSSION: DAVID

- Identify the 2 ethical dilemmas: disposal/recycling of old cells (eco vs output), and people leaving the grid/distribution issues

RECOMMENDATIONS: ROBERT

- Eco-friendly vs output: prioritize sustainability; output will increase over time

- Distribution issues: incentivize staying on the grid; allow selling excess energy; tax write-offs; shift towards decentralized energy; government should shift more towards renewable energy

CONCLUSION: ANAHITA

- Summarize all findings

REFERENCES: ALL

Paper For Above Instructions

Front Matter

Author team: Robert (front matter, recommendations), Anahita (introduction, conclusion), Assia (background), David (discussion). Topic: Current downsides of solar panel energy and why we should or should not use them.

Introduction

Solar photovoltaic (PV) technology converts sunlight into electricity using semiconductor cells. Since early experiments in the 19th and early 20th centuries, PV has matured into a major source of electricity generation worldwide, enabling distributed generation on rooftops and utility-scale solar farms [1][2]. This report examines foundational concepts (PV basics and energy distribution), explains why solar power is needed, summarizes its history briefly, and frames two core dilemmas: end-of-life management of solar modules (recycling/disposal) and grid-distribution impacts from increasing distributed PV adoption (including customers leaving the grid). The purpose is to weigh whether society should continue scaling solar deployment while managing its downsides responsibly.

Background: Types, Development, and Benefits

Historically, PV development moved from selenium cells to crystalline silicon and then to diverse thin-film and emerging chemistries. Major families include silicon-based crystalline cells (mono- and polycrystalline), thin films such as CdTe and CIGS, and newer laboratory-scale technologies like perovskite, organic photovoltaics (OPV), dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSC), and quantum dot PV [3][4]. Each class balances efficiency, cost, durability, and recyclability differently. Silicon technologies dominate commercially for their longevity and high efficiency, while perovskites and organic cells offer potential low-cost processing but face stability and lead-content concerns [5][6].

Benefits of solar PV are substantial: low marginal operating emissions, modularity, and the ability to deploy close to loads to reduce transmission losses. However, as deployment scales, challenges emerge: supply-chain material constraints, module degradation and end-of-life management, hazardous materials in some thin films, and the technical and economic impacts of large-scale distributed PV on existing grid operations [7][8].

Discussion: Two Core Ethical and Practical Dilemmas

Dilemma 1 — End-of-life management: high-output vs more recyclable modules

As millions of modules reach end of life over the coming decades, the PV sector faces a waste-management challenge. High-efficiency cells (e.g., advanced silicon or tandem perovskite-silicon) maximize energy generation per area but often use complex multilayer stacks, rare materials, or encapsulants that complicate recycling [4][9]. Conversely, some emerging technologies emphasize material simplicity and circularity but currently lag in efficiency or longevity. The ethical dilemma is whether to prioritize near-term energy yield (to decarbonize faster) or prioritize long-term material circularity and lower toxic risk.

Evidence suggests prioritizing sustainability in design-for-recycling reduces downstream environmental burdens, but the transition must avoid slowing deployment so much that fossil-fuel emissions persist longer [5][10]. Policy can steer manufacturers toward recyclable designs, incentivize extended producer responsibility, and fund recycling capacity to reconcile both objectives.

Dilemma 2 — Grid impacts: leaving the grid vs distribution equity

Widespread rooftop PV and battery storage enable customers to reduce grid reliance and sometimes exit certain services, raising distributional and technical concerns. If many customers "go off-grid" or dramatically reduce utility revenues, remaining customers may face higher fixed costs, and utilities may underinvest in reliability or grid modernization [7][11]. Simultaneously, decentralized PV can enhance resilience and reduce transmission needs when properly integrated.

Technically, high penetrations of distributed PV introduce variability, voltage regulation issues, and reverse power flows that require updated grid management, smarter inverters, and flexible resources like storage and demand response [12]. Ethically, there is a balance between individual autonomy and system-level fairness: policies should avoid subsidizing grid abandonment that shifts costs to less affluent customers.

Recommendations

1. Prioritize sustainable module design and build recycling capacity. Policymakers should mandate or incentivize design-for-recycling, extended producer responsibility, and investment in recycling infrastructure to handle future PV waste streams [9][10]. This allows high deployment while reducing long-term environmental liabilities.

2. Support R&D for high-efficiency, low-impact technologies. Continued investment in perovskite tandem stability and non-toxic materials can yield high-output modules that are also easier to decommission responsibly [5].

3. Reform utility and market structures to integrate distributed PV equitably. Implement time-varying tariffs, value-of-solar-based compensation, and grid access charges that reflect cost causation to avoid cross-subsidies [11][12]. Encourage net billing designs that reward exported energy while ensuring the utility can maintain critical services.

4. Incentivize grid-connected resilience and allow customer value-capture. Programs should enable customers to sell excess energy (peer-to-peer or through utilities) and receive tax credits for grid-supporting behaviors, while promoting community solar to expand access to those who cannot install rooftop systems [13].

5. Phase-in regulatory frameworks for PV lifecycle management. Combine producer responsibility, government recycling subsidies, and standards for module content disclosure to make end-of-life planning mandatory today rather than reactive tomorrow [9][10].

Conclusion

Solar PV is essential for decarbonization, but scaling it responsibly requires confronting two linked dilemmas: end-of-life material management (eco-friendly versus maximal output) and the socioeconomic and technical effects of distributed PV on grid distribution and equity. The optimal pathway couples continued deployment to meet climate goals with policy and technological measures that prioritize sustainability, recycling infrastructure, fair market design, and grid modernization. By aligning incentives for manufacturers, utilities, policymakers, and consumers, society can maximize the climate and economic benefits of solar while minimizing environmental and distributional harms.

References

  1. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2023). "Renewables 2023 — Analysis and forecast to 2028." https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2023
  2. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (2020). "End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels." https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/73841.pdf
  3. Fraunhofer ISE. (2023). "Photovoltaics Report." https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/photovoltaics-report.html
  4. Fthenakis, V. M. (2012). "End-of-life management and recycling pathways for photovoltaic modules." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 6034–6041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.07.007
  5. NREL & DOE. (2018). "Perovskite Solar Cells: Stability, Toxicity, and Next Steps." Nature Energy commentary. https://www.nature.com/articles/nenergy201814
  6. Chen, T., et al. (2020). "Emerging photovoltaic technologies: materials, performance, and sustainability." Nature Energy, 5(8), 616–627. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0640-2
  7. GTM Research / Wood Mackenzie. (2019). "Distributed PV and the Grid: Impacts and Policy Pathways." https://www.woodmac.com/research/products/power-markets/
  8. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2019). "E-waste and Solar Panels: Forecasts and Policy Challenges." https://www.unep.org/resources/report
  9. Kim, H. C., & Fthenakis, V. (2011). "Life cycle assessment of high-efficiency PV technologies." Progress in Photovoltaics, 19(6), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.1050
  10. REN21. (2023). "Renewables Global Status Report." https://www.ren21.net/reports/global-status-report/

Related Assignments