Tag: energy

FPV

May 13, 2026

@Mike Popp/TIMES RECORD

Several weeks ago, a front-page article in my local newspaper wrote about a study to save Arkansas farmlands. The study comes as solar leasing has become an increasingly attractive option.  Michael Popp, agricultural economist with the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, said Utility-scale solar installations are projected to occupy about 0.2% of Arkansas’s 13.7 million acres (5,544,193 ha) of agricultural land, with some counties expected to see 1.7% of cropland converted.  Solar leases bring between US$450 and US$2,500 an acre, far outpacing traditional agricultural rental rates of US$50 an acre for non-irrigated cropland, US$150 for irrigated land, and US$20 for pasture.  Solar developers typically seek flat, well-drained land near transmission infrastructure, which tend to be the same characteristics that make productive farmland.  As solar competes with farmland across Arkansas, University of Arkansas researchers are testing whether a different approach could meet energy demands without taking acreage out of production.  A new project at the Rice Research and Extension Center is examining the feasibility of floating solar arrays (FPV) installed on irrigation reservoirs and waterways to reduce pressure to convert cropland while adding benefits for farmers.

When I went online, I found floating solar or floating photovoltaics (FPV) are solar panels mounted on a floating structure usually consisting of plastic buoys and cables placed on a body of water.  The systems can have advantages over land photovoltaics (PV) as water surfaces may be less expensive than land and there are fewer regulations for structures built on water not used for recreation.  Life cycle analysis indicates that foam-based FPV have some of the shortest energy payback times (1.3 years) and the lowest greenhouse gas emissions to energy ratio (11 kg CO2 eq/MWh) in crystalline silicon solar photovoltaic technologies reported.  FPV can be used to generate electricity for any application as well as to make green hydrogen via electrolysis on the same water they are floating on. Floating arrays also achieve higher efficiencies than PV panels because the water cools them.  The panels can have a special coating to prevent rust or corrosion while providing shade, slowing evaporation, and inhibiting the growth of algae in the water where they are installed.

Popp said the research is focused on balancing competing interests as solar expansion accelerates.  “The goals are to not convert agricultural land to solar panel use, save irrigation water and create a synergy between utility companies, solar investors, farmers and policymakers.”  Researchers say floating solar could offer a path forward in a debate that has increasingly pitted energy development against agricultural preservation, providing a way to do both without forcing farmers to choose.  Along with physical installation of FPVs, researchers are surveying Mid-South residents and farmers to gauge attitudes toward floating solar and willingness to pay to avoid converting farmland.  The project is a collaboration between agricultural economists, engineers and students with the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture.  The survey is open through May 15, 2026.

THOUGHTS: Constructing FPV on waterways is one of several innovative ways being researched to provide increased use of land under a solar array.  Growing native wildflowers under and around PV (ecovoltaics) restore ecosystems and supports pollinators like bees and butterflies.  This boosts insect diversity, reduces long-term maintenance costs (vs turfgrass), and can increase crop yields on surrounding farms.  Growing crops or grazing livestock under and around solar arrays (Agrivoltaics) combines agriculture with energy production to boost land-use efficiency.  This symbiotic approach improves crop yields for certain plants by providing shade and reducing water loss, while the transpiration from plants cools the panels, increasing electricity generation.  Innovation is not “one or the other”, but can be both/and.  Act for all.  Change is coming and it starts with you.

Recapture

December 23, 2024

Ariana Gomez for The New York Times

Back in 2022 I blogged on growing battle surrounding carbon recapture in the US’s Mississippi River Chemical Corridor, commonly known as Cancer Alley. While critics acknowledged the process worked, they objected to the pollution caused by the facility itself, and the energy required to power the equipment. Today, my NY Times feed reported that more than 2 years later over 1,000 big companies have pledged to eliminate their carbon emissions over the next few decades, and part of those efforts came from paying for carbon dioxide removal. During 2024, Microsoft, Google, and British Airways were among the companies that committed a total of US$1.6 billion to purchase carbon removal credits. This is up from less than US$1 million in 2019, and it is believed this will grow to US$10 billion during 2025, and reach US$1.2 trillion by 2050. While huge sums of money are being dedicated to the emerging field, these projects will not have a meaningful effect on global temperatures anytime soon. There are only a few dozen operational facilities today that capture only a trace of carbon emissions. It is estimated that if 100’s of more such plants were built it would only recapture about 1% of the worlds annual carbon dioxide emissions.

When I looked online, I found that while there are several ideas for geoengineering plans and technologies designed to cool the planet, carbon dioxide recapture is attracting the big money. Investors believe while this will have a negligible short term impact on temperatures, it will begin to make a difference as emissions fall and the technology becomes more powerful. While some carbon polluters have committed to reducing carbon emissions, more are opting to continue to pollute and instead paying for carbon recapture credits. The US government is supporting the recapture movement through the Inflation Reduction Act that has tripled tax credits for capture and storage of carbon directly from the atmosphere. This 2021 bipartisan bill included US$3.5 billion to build four demonstration projects.

Pulling greenhouse gases out of the air is expensive and currently costs as much as US$1,000 per ton to capture and sequester carbon dioxide. Analysts say the price would need to drop to US$100 a ton for the industry to be viable. Damien Steel, chief executive of the carbon recapture firm Deep Sky, says, “This isn’t a market. A market means liquidity, repeatability, standards. We have none of that here.” As the NY Times reported, the industry is still creating a form of gold rush as investors readily fund new companies hoping that some of their bets will pay off. Many scientists and activists say the most effective way to combat global warming is to rapidly phase out oil, gas, and coal, as it is the burning of these fossil fuels which heat the planet. Former Vice President Al Gore, co-founder of Climate Trace, said, “We need to obey the first law of holes. When you’re in one, stop digging.”

THOUGHTS: Carbon recapture is only the latest technological innovation humans employed to try and resolve a problem of our own making. As an archaeologist the irony was not lost on me that I was digging through the trash dumps that the next culture had buried as they created a new living space on the remains of the past. When the pollution became too great, people would move to the next pristine site and begin again. The problem now is the pristine places are diminishing, and the polluted locations are broadening. This is particularly evident as our land, water, sea, and air are polluted on a globalized scale. If we do not “stop digging” our holes, the earth will be left for the next interplanetary archaeologists to dig. Act for all. Change is coming and it starts with you.