We are,
I admit, vaguely desperate for solar. We hope (we hope! we hope!) we are
getting passive solar designed into the house, but we would love to have a
place for active solar (and the $0.12
electric bill the Green House people had for October-November is doing
nothing to dissuade us…). However, active solar may be a challenge on our lot.
The
property to our south has some gorgeous pecans that provide some passive solar
shading to the southern part of our property during the summer months. Because
of those trees, any hope of placing solar panels would have to be on the
northern side of the property, so the top of the garage would be a perfect
place. However, there’s an unfortunately placed juvenile pecan just to the rear
of where the garage might go. This tree will shade the garage in the morning
hours and, over time, shade more and more of the panels. Not good. Furthermore,
because of the neighbor’s trees, that corner is the best corner for a garden,
but not after that juvenile grows into an adult.
So…..
Which is greener? (1) Cutting down the tree, replacing it elsewhere on the lot,
generating electricity, and eating homegrown vegetables? or (2) Leaving the
tree, steaming about the Green House people’s less-than-a-quarter a month
electric bill, eating Twinkies, and dying 15.3 years earlier because we lived
anger-(and cream-)filled lives?
Insert
advice below (or the tree gets it!).
I'd go with the tree. It's a huge carbon sink and helps prevent erosion and flooding. And old trees die (as I'm learning) so you might have the ability to do the solar and garden later anyway.
ReplyDeleteWe get the heebie-jeebies about cutting down trees, so it's a hard one. On the other hand, we'll see how that tree looks this spring. It didn't get any watering during that vicious drought last year...
DeleteI'm obviously biased toward solar, but I also like trees. I would be on the fence if it were just tree versus solar, but the vegetable garden tips the balance for me. I vote for replacing the tree somewhere else on the lot and embracing solar and homegrown veggies.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, our solar tracking software says we've offset 45 trees worth of carbon since October.
Dang, they must be burning dag-nasty coal for your power!!! Thanks for the info: I was wondering what the carbon benefit was compared to trees.
DeleteDoes the software consider the power source?
I don't think so. But most of Austin's power comes from coal, right? Does AE have more and less dag-nasty varieties?
Delete36% coal, 31% natty gas, 30% nuclear, and 3% renewables (solar, wind, hydro), at least according to this presentation by someone from Austin Energy: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/ppts/28.pdf
DeleteMore coal than I would have guessed (woulda thought natural gas would have been higher).