The government isn’t exactly the ineffective organism I often make it out to be, because it’s certainly effective at ruin. You can bet dollars to donuts that if there were a faster or better way to wreck something, bureaucrats and politicians will certainly figure it out—in fact, this is the only time you can guarantee the government will be efficient, cutting out unnecessary steps to reach critical mass. Case in point: solar panels.

Now, solar panels are notorious for leaching heavy metals and toxic compounds as they begin to deteriorate, and since there is no real recycling method and the reality of decommissioned solar panels piling up into millions of pounds of landfill trash is a compounding issue, many have raised the concern about these solar panel dumps being hazardous waste sites, and the seepage into water tables and other water supply sources via the ground. Even far-left outlet Mother Jones said this:

Solar panels are … complex pieces of technology that become big, bulky sheets of electronic waste at the end of their lives—and right now, most of the world doesn’t have a plan for dealing with that.

But we’ll need to develop one soon, because the solar e-waste glut is coming. By 2050, the International Renewable Energy Agency projects that up to 78 million metric tons of solar panels will have reached the end of their life, and that the world will be generating about 6 million metric tons of new solar e-waste annually.

Well, the government is hacking the contamination machine, and has moved to put the panels right into the water supply, or, more appropriately, on it—a California water utility company in Chula Vista has a plan to install “floating solar panels” on the surface of the Sweetwater Reservoir, an island that would be almost ten acres in area size. Here’s the story, from NBC 7 San Diego:

Floating solar panels proposed for Sweetwater Reservoir

General Manager Carlos Quintero said the water agency is exploring the environmental impact of a 9.5 acre floating solar array that would be placed near the Sweetwater Dam. It would cover roughly 1.3% of the reservoir, Quintero said, and could generate as much as two-thirds of the energy needed to make the reservoir water drinkable and decrease a small amount of evaporation.

‘Really, the main benefit is to our ratepayers,’ Quintero said. ‘We could be saving upwards of $27 million in a 25-year span.’

Yes, California bureaucrats are motivated by concern for the people and how much utilities cost—if you believe that, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Of course, the plan faces opposition:

‘I’m not ready to concede that floating panels on water surface is appropriate here,’ said long-time Bonita resident Karen Henry.

Henry argued the floating solar panels could introduce more biological waste from birds and rodents. She also [said] installing the panels flies in the face of the water authority’s own water diversion system, which keeps industrial runoff from entering the reservoir.

‘When you build a floating solar panel, you’re creating industrialization on your water, and you’re bypassing this diversion system,’ Henry said with a shrug. ‘Just because you can treat the water and take a contaminant out doesn’t mean you should allow that contaminant into the water.’

That’s exactly right, because what kind of treatment processes are involved to make the water “potable” again? Municipal water authorities often use chemicals to decontaminate, or neutralize contaminants in the water—especially in warmer areas, like California. As a long-time resident of Tucson, I can say firsthand that if you use hot water in the summer, the smell of chlorine is overpowering as it comes out of the tap; taking a shower can be nauseating. Because it’s such a hot climate, bacteria in water sources thrive more than they do elsewhere, so the water company uses heavy chlorine treatments. This is the same case for the Chula Vista area:

Does the chlorine in San Diego’s tap water make it safe to drink? It depends who you ask. San Diego water is typically kept under the EPA-mandated levels in parts-per-million (PPM). But advocacy groups paint a different picture of the controversial disinfectant.

The EPA says it’s safe? Well then allow me file that away in my brain under “not safe.”

So, what it takes to remove heavy metals and other poisons after a solar panel begins to break down in the water I’m not sure, but what I do know is that bureaucrats are not concerned about pushing out chemically-saturated water to consumers to drink and use. And, what I also know is that solar panels have been known to contain PFAS, or those “forever chemicals,” which cannot be removed from the water. (Especially if these panels come from China.)

Quintero says that the utility company hopes to “make a decision” within the next year and half as to whether or not they’ll proceed with the plan, but what’s ironic is that if I had to guess, I’d suspect that the cost of the project will exceed the supposed $27,000,000 projected savings for the ratepayer, which will no doubt fall on the taxpayers—Sweetwater is a publicly-owned water agency.

What a deal, huh?

Government spends you into the hole, installs ten acres of eyesore on a beautiful body of water, and poisons your drinking water too.

Let’s hope the California residents can put a stop to this—fingers crossed.

Image: Public domain.