Environmental Monitoring of photovoltaic solar plants, why don't we agree?

When planning the Environmental Surveillance of photovoltaic solar plants it is not the same as this one being in Albacete, Valladolid or Tarragona. After reviewing a multitude of Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Monitoring Plans for solar plants throughout Spain, we came to this conclusion: we don't agree.

We analyze the differences in the Environmental Monitoring of a photovoltaic solar plant depending on the region in which it is built and operated.

At the bottom of the page you can carry out a survey to learn more about the Environmental Surveillance of photovoltaic solar plants.

Environmental Monitoring of a Photovoltaic Solar Plant Under Construction

For this first phase of works, there is not much discussion. There is a consensus in the controls to be carried out by Environmental Surveillance of a photovoltaic solar plant. The controls to be carried out in relation to the damage to the flora, the atmosphere, the production of waste, etc. are more or less common to all the Environmental Impact Statements (and Environmental Monitoring Plans) of photovoltaic solar plants in Spain. Requirements are considered in accordance with the true impacts that this type of facility can produce, such as the elimination of vegetation cover, the production of waste and its management, among other factors.

What is not so common is the Frequency of Environmental Surveillance visits under construction. While in some Autonomous Communities they require a weekly frequency, in others the monthly frequency is considered sufficient. To make environmental monitoring in the operational phase as objective as possible, we believe that the frequency could be established based on two factors:

• Depending on the MW built (occupied area indicator)
• Existence of relevant biotic or abiotic elements that may be affected (flora, fauna, etc.)

If the first one is greater than 20 and the second one is greater than 1, the frequency should be, in our opinion, at a weekly minimum.

The frequency must be established depending on the MW built and the existence of biotic or abiotic elements that may be affected.

Environmental Monitoring of a Photovoltaic Solar Plant in Operation or Operation Phase

This is really where consensus is non-existent. We started by reviewing the Controls to be performed. If the main environmental impacts described in the environmental impact studies of solar plants (for which there seems to be a consensus) are the loss of habitats for fauna, why isn't environmental surveillance focused on assessing and preventing the impact of these installations on fauna? Since large areas are being occupied with photovoltaic solar plants, we understand that now is the opportunity to generate information on how different factors (arthropods, birds, other vertebrates, vegetation, erosion,...) respond to the installation. Likewise, it is also necessary to obtain more information on the incidence of fences, studying the mortality associated with them due to collision among other study factors. Finally, we must not forget the exhaustive control of the effectiveness of the corrective and compensatory measures implemented.

If the main environmental impacts of solar plants are the loss of habitats for wildlife, why isn't operational environmental surveillance focused on assessing this impact of these installations on fauna?

La Frequency of visits to the installations seems to be another point of disagreement, the variability of criteria is astounding. We find communities that require weekly visits to others that require them on a quarterly basis, but... Isn't that the same type of project? Aren't the impacts very similar?

With the duration Of the follow-up In the operating phase, the same thing happens. We see that for large projects, in some communities, monitoring is for the entire useful life of the project, although this is not common, since monitoring is usually for the first five years of the project and sometimes for the first 3.

Finally, it should be noted that it is necessary to define Who will carry out environmental monitoring, since, although most Environmental Impact Statements indicate the need for a competent technician to be. We understand that this definition should be specified to prevent environmental monitoring from being carried out by personnel dedicated to other plant issues whose main function and knowledge are not the factors to be controlled (fauna, erosion, waste,...).

Let's unify Environmental Surveillance criteria for photovoltaic solar plants

In order to publicize the case studies of the Environmental Surveillance of photovoltaic solar plants, we have created this very brief and anonymous survey which we invite to complete all environmental technicians, environmental consultants, promoters and technicians of the administrations.

The objective is none other than to take a first step towards unifying criteria: to obtain a protocol or formulas that help environmental administrations and technicians to establish the controls that must be carried out in a given project. Also consistently define the frequency and duration of such controls in the Environmental Surveillance of photovoltaic solar plants.

Once you complete the survey, you will be able to see the overall results of the survey. Thank you for participating.