Solar Power: Balancing Benefits and Challenges
People are seeing the light with solar energy – it’s becoming popular because it’s clean and renewable. But it’s not just about the good stuff, we’ve got to deal with the tough stuff too.
Solar power is a game-changer. Users save money. The earth breathes easier as it curbs pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Plus, the drop in the cost of solar tech opens doors for more folks. It’s easy to see why it’s giving fossil fuels a run for their money! Solar panel tech has also got a boost. They’re getting better at turning sunbeams into electricity, making them even more valuable and useful.
But solar power has problems too. One worry is what to do with old solar tools. More and more solar panels are getting very old. Sadly, many end up in trash piles. This can hurt the earth. Making solar panels uses things that could harm nature if not taken care of right. So, we must be careful with the things used to make solar panels.
We need to take steps now. Starting recycling for old solar panels can help the environment and cut down trash. Scientists and engineers must find ways to reuse solar panels easier. Their work should make solar panels greener and hurt the Earth less. Solar power can be good for people and the earth if we use it right. It makes energy from sunlight. This is cleaner than getting energy from things like coal or oil. But solar panels need rare metals and can be hard to throw away. If we think about these problems, we can make solar work better. We can find ways to build solar with less rare things or build them to last. We can also find good ways to fix solar when it’s done. If we do this, solar can give us energy without hurting the earth too much. Then people can use solar for a long time.
References
1. Atasu, A., Duran, S., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2021, June 18). The Dark Side of Solar Power. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/06/the-dark-side-of-solar-power
2. Kerr, E. (2019, March 21). The Future of Solar is Bright. Science in the News; Harvard University. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/future-solar-bright/
3. Stauffer, N. (2020, June 23). Researchers find benefits of solar photovoltaics outweigh costs. MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology.(https://news.mit.edu/2020/researchers-find-solar-photovoltaics-benefits-outweigh-costs-0623)
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
Hey, Snowman!
I appreciate your request for Feedback and will respond to it in the order I hear back from the six students I have not yet served.
You didn’t specify a time limit for me, but I hope you will.
As you know, I expect you to spend as much time revising your work as I spend providing feedback.
So . . . care to set a limit, or prescribe what sort of feedback you’d most like to receive, or . . . just take your chances?
Thanks! (I hope you’re enjoying your Spring Break!)
—DSH
LikeLike
I don’t quite know how to respond, Snowman. You sound like a different writer every time you post something. I have no idea what your authentic voice sounds like. Your daily Agenda Notes changed dramatically after a conversation we had about tone. The new Notes sound more reliably like contemporaneous notes made in class. Your Definition argument was nicely phrased but largely empty of actual content, and didn’t respond at all to the Hypothesis you’ve elected to research.
Now this, which is an entirely new voice not at all in keeping with anything else you’ve written. If you were deliberately trying to de-academicize your writing, you certainly accomplished that, and went way overboard. This essay-in-progress would be appropriate for a middle-school audience.
It also deviates entirely from your Hypothesis. In my feedback on your Definition argument, I worried that you had already strayed from something specific to a very general “comparison of energy sources” review. I’m even more worried now that you haven’t focused your research on anything in particular. I acknowledge that your remarks here have narrowed from “all energy sources” to “solar power.” That’s an important step.
I remain confident that you’re capable of much better and more authentic work than I’ve seen so far, and I’m still hopeful that your Rewrites will move closer, much closer, to a tightly argued specific Hypothesis like the one we agreed to in your Conference.
—Until you replace your Hypothesis/Proposal with a much better one, I’m going to hold you to the original plan.
—Concentrate on the exponential growth of solar panel efficiency and the prospect that, by 2030, cars could power themselves by collecting solar energy using their own dedicated panels, or perhaps even collecting the sun’s rays with their “paint jobs” and converting it to motion.
Of course, I want you to “follow the research” and adapt your thesis to the surprising finds you encounter. If you find something wonderful along the way, I’ll be all ears.
If you need assistance crafting appropriate causal claims, I’m very eager to help you.
—For a car to power itself with panels, it will have to have either a very steady supply of sunlight or a way to store captured energy for “night-driving,” for example.
—How has the technology of solar collection improved over the last decade or so? Are there numbers for efficiency? Is the progress already made sustainable for the next decade or so?
—Can a paint job be exploited to become a solar collector?
—Will we always need bigger and bigger batteries for “downtime driving,” or are there prospects for vastly improved storage techniques?
That’s the first few that come to mind. I’m here to partner with you as soon as you ask, Snowman.
Provisionally graded at Canvas. Regrades are always available following significant improvements.
LikeLike
MAKE NO CHANGES TO THIS POST. Instead:
1. Copy and paste its contents into your new Causal Rewrite—Snowman.
2. If you require no Feedback, that completes your assignment. You will receive no Feedback, but you could still revise your work without feedback and receive a Regrade.
3. Remember, your complete Portfolio MUST CONTAIN evidence of Feedback and Revision for two of your three short arguments, Definition / Causal / Rebuttal. If you receive no feedback for THIS assignment, you’ll need Feedback on the other two.
4. If you DO want feedback following your first draft grade, put your Rewrite in to Feedback Please.
5. THAT’S NOT THE LAST STEP.
6. The last step is to leave a Reply on your Rewrite post instructing me how much time you want me to spend on your Feedback. For every hour I spend, you’ll owe me an hour of Revision Time.
LikeLike