Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hunter

(40,499 posts)
2. The rechargeable batteries these systems use are a beastly problem.
Fri Jan 27, 2012, 05:56 PM
Jan 2012

The least expensive solar lighting systems and cell phone charging stations use NiCads or Lead Acid batteries. These batteries don't last long and become toxic waste if they are not properly recycled.

In many parts of the world lead acid batteries are "recycled" by cutting them open, dumping the acid on the ground, and "refining" the lead by hammering it or by melting it in open crucibles. The problem with NiCads are similar. They are simply thrown away to decompose in the environment, or worse they are recycled and end up in the cheap jewelry which sometimes makes it's way to places like Wal-Mart.

NiMH and Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries are less toxic, but they are more expensive and require more sophisticated charge controllers.

Solar is dirty when done cheap.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»In the Developing World, ...»Reply #2