Orange County NC Website
For Mr. Wallace, you mentioned the sound levels that are put out by the inverters, and I <br /> believe the figure was on the order of by the time it hit the house it was 45 db. Two questions <br /> on that; one, do you have any information on the spectral characteristics of the noise that comes <br /> out of the inverters? There is a huge difference between a 45 db sound level at 60 hertz and at <br /> 480. It's a subjective way to figure out, is this a 45 db that is going to keep you up at night, or <br /> can you ignore it. The second thing is; do you know the weighting algorithm that was used to <br /> come up with that 45 db figure, so that if it wishes to be verified later, or citizens wish to make <br /> measurements, they will know how set their noise meters? <br /> Mike Wallace: The answer to the second question; I do not. That would have to come from <br /> the manufacturers of the inverters. The answer to the first question is; there is that out there <br /> published. We do have some of it, and I can get that for you, so you can see what frequencies <br /> these db's are coming at. <br /> Pete Hallenbeck: That would be great. The planning board meets the first Wednesday of the <br /> next month. And for Mr. Cleveland; are these panels gonna—are they amorphous silicon, or it <br /> is pure crystalline silicon? Do you know. <br /> Tommy Cleveland: No, they are not amorphous. I'm not sure if they are poly-crystalline or <br /> mono-crystalline, but they are—those two are very similar, and amorphous is somewhat <br /> different. They are not amorphous. <br /> Pete Hallenbeck: Okay, I'm just curious if you could find out. It's always interesting to see with <br /> the trade-offs people are making on panel costs versus the area of the farm. And as I'm sure <br /> you know, the poly-silicone crystal —well mono-crystal: smallest, best efficiency; poly: higher; <br /> amorphous: higher still. So, I was just curious to see what that trade-off was. <br /> Tommy Cleveland: Amorphous silicon is significantly less efficient, and there is very little <br /> amorphous— sorry, as far as area. I thought you were referring to efficiency, and you said size. <br /> So, you were correct. <br /> Pete Hallenbeck: If you can find out exactly what kind of panel it is, that would be interesting. <br /> The second thing is, with regard to the glare, do you know what the Brewster angle is on the <br /> cover glass, because that would pretty much determine the glare the residents would see, who <br /> are due west of the site? <br /> Tommy Cleveland: I don't know that, but I could reference you to Sandia National Labs and an <br /> FAA glare calculator built specifically for airports and solar sited at airports. They've got a <br /> calculator where you can put in, on a Google earth map, the location of the panels and a <br /> location of interest and determine if there is glare any hours of the year. <br /> I don't like the Brewster angle for those - <br /> Pete Hallenbeck: I'd still like to see that Brewster angle. I have panels at home. From <br /> mowing around during different times of the day, I have some idea of what the glare is. But the <br /> situation that we're talking about here is one that comes very close to the equinox. The sun is <br /> rising. It's going to hit the panels, and it doesn't matter what the coatings are. As soon as that <br /> angle is under the Brewster angle for the glass, it's going to bounce off, and that will be the <br /> glare. So, that would be an interesting number that would let us be able to figure out how many <br /> days per year there will be glare during the morning. <br />