The photovoltaic industry on the path to a sustainable future — Environmental and occupational health issues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As it supplies solar power, a priori considered harmless for the environment and human health compared with fossil fuels, the photovoltaic (PV) industry seems to contribute optimally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and, overall, to sustainable development. However, considering the forecast for rapid growth, its use of potentially toxic substances and manufacturing processes presenting health and safety problems may jeopardize its benefits. This paper aims to establish a profile of the PV industry in order to determine current and emerging environmental and health concerns. A review of PV system life cycle assessments, in light of the current state of the industry and its developmental prospects, reveals information deficits concerning some sensitive life cycle indicators and environmental impacts, together with incomplete information on toxicological data and studies of workers' exposure to different chemical and physical hazards. Although solar panel installation is generally considered relatively safe, the occupational health concerns related to the growing number of hazardous materials handled in the PV industry warrants an all-inclusive occupational health and safety approach in order to achieve an optimal equilibrium with sustainability. To prevent eco-health problems from offsetting the benefits currently offered by the PV industry, manufacturers should cooperate actively with workers, researchers and government agencies toward improved and more transparent research, the adoption of specific and stricter regulations, the implementation of preventive risk management of occupational health and safety and, lastly, greater responsibilization toward PV systems from their design until their end of life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".