A Water Expert’s Perspective

 As a participant of the Sweetwater Authority Community Advisory Group, I was presented with the Floating Solar System concept that would be constructed onto the Sweetwater Reservoir. While I applaud SWA in their efforts to reduce energy costs and seek renewable alternatives, the idea of building it onto the community's drinking water source is troubling. 

As an expert in the water field, and a firm advocate of “common sense,” it would behoove our community to demand a full EIR (Environmental Impact Report) before allowing Sweetwater Authority to move forward. A project of this scale is bound to come with ramifications – specifically to our drinking water source. One foreseeable concern, as a result of ultraviolet radiation from the sun, is that floating solar systems, are generally made of materials like silicon, glass, aluminum, and plastics, which can degrade releasing harmful materials like “PFAS, PFOS & PFOA” (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, perfluorooctanoic acid). These synthetic chemicals are engineered to be resistant to water, heat, grease, and oil. Popular in consumer products since the 1950s, “PFAS” for short, are found in thousands of household items, including: carpets, clothing, cleaning products, food packaging, firefighting foam, paints, and of course plastics. The EPA classifies them as carcinogens capable of causing other illnesses, such as, endocrine disruption and organ damage. They are referred to as “forever chemicals” because they are nearly indestructible and can take many years to clear our bodies.

As a result, the EPA developed a ruling with an enforceable maximum contaminant level (MCL) standard, as PFAS have been detected in certain levels in groundwater and surface water sources throughout the United States. This ruling gives drinking water providers three years to follow through with a laboratory analysis to determine what types of PFAS they have, and at what levels. They then have a two-year deadline to mitigate these potential precursors with some form of treatment measure, like reverse osmosis, granular activated carbon, ion exchange or blending/dilution.

Another potential hazard is the opportunity for water-borne microbiological bacteria to proliferate. Birds, rodents and other pests will likely congregate upon the solar panel system. As a result, this could disrupt the natural flora and fauna of our local ecosystem and spread viruses and pathogenic diseases. Again, by conducting a comprehensive environmental impact study, the district can ensure that they are moving forward with only the best methods for the community they serve.  

Reasons to Consider an EIR 

1. Electricity and water just don't mix. I see potential problems developing from electrical conduit, inverters and solar voltaic panels degrading and shorting out overtime. Aside from performance issues, which will require downtime for maintenance, any transient current that may be created in the reservoir could become dangerous to human & animal life.

2.  As the ultraviolet radiation breaks down the plastics overtime, we will potentially end up with a higher concentration of PFAS in the reservoir. These PFAS are harmful to human and animal life as they cause endocrine disruption and carcinogens just to name a few.

3. Once the floating array is constructed, animals will nest on the system and we will end up with high levels of scat and fecal contamination from rodents and birds, which are known to carry cryptosporidium, giardia lamblia and other pathogenic diseases that will end up in the drinking water source. Likewise, this will also impact performance and may require permitting as this will require specialized cleaning and maintenance. 

4. Industrialization of the reservoir will also impact the natural order of the flora & fauna, as well as, the biological eco system in place. There will be nothing "green" about this.

5. Along with industrialization, we will lose the organic and natural scenic beauty of the reservoir. This will have negative consequences and decrease the value associated with its public image. 

6. Furthermore, industrializing the reservoir can impair and be a potential threat as a fire protection source should the reservoir be needed for aerial firefighting support.  

On another point, SWA board has a fiduciary responsibility and obligation to the community it serves. It should be common practice and policy for large-scale civic ventures of this nature to go out to bid and for the board to seek multiple competing vendors, and not fall into the practice of single-sourcing. Thus far, this has not been evident in the process. Additionally, a cost-benefit-analysis (CBA) would be a wise investment comparing a floating solar system vs constructing one on-land, and the provision of existing successful case models permitted and approved meeting CA regulatory compliance for transparency.  

For detailed information on this endeavor, interested persons may visit the project’s page on the Sweetwater Authority Website at: https://www.sweetwater.org/477/Floating-Solar-Panels-Project

Written by Felix Felix

Felix Felix knows water. With over 30 years of experience in the water industry, his professional background bridges Public Administration and Civil Engineering. His career experience includes being a General Manager for several districts. Currently, he is the CEO and Founder of a Water Resource Management consulting firm. He has a long standing relationship with the EPA, SWRCB, BOR, DWR, LAFCo and other state, county and local forms of government. He has provided services for the US Air Force, municipalities, public utilities, and community services districts. He finds it altruistic and rewarding to be of service to communities, especially his own. 

Return to main page