To the editor:

As Monticello looks at a proposal for floating solar panels, it should ask about water pollution and the declining value of the electricity. 

The water pollution comes from solar panels catching fire. A 44-acre floating solar array in a reservoir near Chiba, Japan, caught fire in a storm, probably because winds made the panels stack up on one another, producing toxic smoke and releases into the water.

You can find it on YouTube. Google: Japan Floating Solar Panel Fire.

Solar panels have lots of dangerous ingredients. The ones that are easy to spell include lead and cadmium, and when the panels burn they release hydrochloric acid. There are lots of other nasty materials.

This is separate from the problem of creating a sterile zone in the lake, in the panels’ shadow.

And if Monticello accepts a share of the revenue as rent, it should be aware that if solar becomes more popular, the value of the electricity will decline. Solar energy floods the California grid at noontime, and through its supply-and-demand pricing system, the wholesale price of electricity declines to zero and often goes below, so the state has to pay its neighbors to accept the electricity. New York’s grid has a similar pricing system. We’re not overwhelmed yet, but basing rent on a project’s revenues can be risky for the landlord.

And is the discount the company is predicting for residents’ NYSEG bills on the whole bill, or just on the electricity portion?

The economics of the project are hard to predict, because most solar panels come from China, and we’re in the middle of a trade war right now. Or maybe we haven’t reached the middle yet.

Matthew L. Wald

Wurtsboro