Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 663–675 | Cite as

Polarized light pollution of matte solar panels: anti-reflective photovoltaics reduce polarized light pollution but benefit only some aquatic insects

  • Dénes Száz
  • Dávid Mihályi
  • Alexandra Farkas
  • Ádám Egri
  • András Barta
  • György Kriska
  • Bruce Robertson
  • Gábor Horváth
ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

Photovoltaic solar panels represent one of the most promising renewable energy sources, but are strong reflectors of horizontally polarized light. Polarized light pollution (PLP) associated with solar panels causes aquatic insects to prefer to oviposit on panels over natural water bodies, with potential to negatively impact their global populations as solar energy expands. We evaluate the hypothesis that anti-reflective coatings (ARCs) used to increase the energy efficiency of solar panels will reduce the amount of PLP they reflect, and their attractiveness to aquatic insects. We created artificial test surfaces that mimicked the optical properties of coated and uncoated solar panels and exposed them to wild populations of polarotactic mayflies (Ephemeroptera), horseflies (Tabanidae) and non-biting midges (Chironomidae) used as indicators of PLP. We evaluated the reflection-polarization properties of test surfaces from four different angles of view and under sunny and overcast skies in the visible and ultraviolet parts of the spectrum. Matte (i.e. ARC-coated) sunlit solar panels were strong sources of horizontally polarized light only when the sun was afront and behind, in contrast to uncoated panels which exceeded common polarization-sensitivity thresholds for aquatic insects from all four viewing directions. As predicted by these polarization patterns, horsefly numbers and water-seeking behaviors were significantly reduced by ARCs. Under overcast skies, both matte and shiny (i.e. uncoated) panels were insect-detectible sources of PLP. Matteness modestly reduced the degree of polarization of reflected light, but not sufficiently such that fewer chironomids were attracted to them. Mayflies actually preferred matte panels under overcast skies. ARCs are most likely to reduce PLP and benefit aquatic insects under sunny skies and when used in conjunction with white non-polarizing gridding, but may actually exacerbate the severity of their negative effects under overcast conditions. Consequently, even current ARC technology has a role to play in aquatic insect conservation, but strategic deployment of solar panels away from water bodies and temperate regions may trump these benefits.

Keywords

Aquatic insect Mayfly Chironomid Horsefly Anti-reflective coating Photovoltaics Polarization Solar panel Polarized light pollution Polarotaxis Polarization vision Visual ecology 

Supplementary material

10841_2016_9897_MOESM1_ESM.doc (1.7 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 1691 kb)

References

  1. Ali K, Khan SA, Jafri MZM (2014) Effect of double layer (SiO2/TiO2) anti-reflective coating on silicon solar cells. Int J Electrochem Soc 9:7865–7874Google Scholar
  2. Alstone P, Gershenson D, Kammen DM (2015) Decentralized energy systems for clean electricity access. Nat Clim Change 5:305–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernáth B, Horváth G, Meyer-Rochow VB (2012) Polarotaxis in egg-laying yellow fever mosquitoes Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti is masked due to infochemicals. J Insect Physiol 58:1000–1006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Blahó M, Egri Á, Barta A, Antoni G, Kriska G, Horváth G (2012a) How can horseflies be captured by solar panels? A new concept of tabanid traps using light polarization and electricity produced by photovoltaics. Vet Parasitol 189:353–365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Blahó M, Egri Á, Báhidszki L, Kriska G, Hegedüs R, Åkesson S, Horváth G (2012b) Spottier targets are less attractive to tabanid flies: on the tabanid-repellency of spotty fur patterns. PLoS One 7(8):e41138. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041138 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Blahó M, Egri Á, Száz D, Kriska G, Åkesson S, Horváth G (2013) Stripes disrupt odour attractiveness to biting horseflies: Battle between ammonia, CO2, and colour pattern for dominance in the sensory systems of host-seeking tabanids. Physiol Behav 119:168–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Blahó M, Herczeg T, Kriska G, Egri Á, Száz D, Farkas A, Tarjányi N, Czinke L, Barta A, Horváth G (2014) Unexpected attraction of polarotactic water-leaving insects to matt black car surfaces: mattness of paintwork cannot eliminate the polarized light pollution of black cars. PLoS One 9(7):e103339. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103339 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Briscoe AD, Chittka L (2001) The evolution of color vision in insects. Ann Rev Entomol 46:471–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell P, Green MA (1987) Light trapping properties of pyramidally textured surfaces. J Appl Phys 62:243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Egri Á, Blahó M, Sándor A, Kriska G, Gyurkovszky M, Farkas R, Horváth G (2012a) New kind of polarotaxis governed by degree of polarization: attraction of tabanid flies to differently polarizing host animals and water surfaces. Naturwissenschaften 99:407–416CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Egri Á, Blahó M, Kriska G, Farkas R, Gyurkovszky M, Åkesson S, Horváth G (2012b) Polarotactic tabanids find striped patterns with brightness and/or polarization modulation least attractive: an advantage of zebra stripes. J Exp Biol 215:736–745CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Egri Á, Blahó M, Száz D, Barta A, Kriska G, Antoni G, Horváth G (2013) A new tabanid trap applying a modified concept of the old flypaper: linearly polarising sticky black surfaces as an effective tool to catch polarotactic horseflies. Int J Parasitol 43:555–563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Encalada AC, Peckarsky BL (2007) A comparative study of the cost of alternative mayfly oviposition behaviors. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:1437–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. EPIA (2012) Connecting the Sun: Solar photovoltaics on the road to large-scale grid integration. European Photovoltaic Industry Association, Brussells, Belgium. http://www.epia.org/news/publications/. Retrieved 7 July 2015
  15. Fletcher RJ, Orrock JL, Robertson BA (2012) How the type of anthropogenic change alters the consequences of ecological traps. Proc Roy Soc B 279:2546–2552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Herczeg T, Blahó M, Száz D, Kriska G, Gyurkovszky M, Farkas R, Horváth G (2014) Seasonality and daily activity of male and female tabanid flies monitored in a Hungarian hill-country pasture by new polarization traps and traditional canopy traps. Parasitol Res 113:4251–4260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Herczeg T, Száz D, Blahó M, Barta A, Gyurkovszky M, Farkas R, Horváth G (2015) The effect of weather variables on the flight activity of horseflies (Diptera: Tabanidae) in the continental climate of Hungary. Parasitol Res 114:1087–1097CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Horváth G (ed) (2014) Polarized light and polarization vision in animal sciences (2nd edn). Springer Series in Vision Research, vol 2 (series eds: SP Collin, JN Marshall). Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  19. Horváth G, Varjú D (1997) Polarization pattern of freshwater habitats recorded by video polarimetry in red, green and blue spectral ranges and its relevance for water detection by aquatic insects. J Exp Biol 200:1155–1163Google Scholar
  20. Horváth G, Varjú D (2004) Polarized light in animal vision—polarization patterns in nature. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Horváth G, Majer J, Horváth L, Szivák I, Kriska G (2008) Ventral polarization vision in tabanids: horseflies and deerflies (Diptera: Tabanidae) are attracted to horizontally polarized light. Naturwissenschaften 95:1093–1100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Horváth G, Kriska G, Malik P, Robertson B (2009) Polarized light pollution: a new kind of ecological photopollution. Front Ecol Environ 7:317–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Horváth G, Blahó M, Egri Á, Kriska G, Seres I, Robertson B (2010a) Reducing the maladaptive attractiveness of solar panels to polarotactic insects. Cons Biol 24:1644–1653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Horváth G, Blahó M, Kriska G, Hegedüs R, Gerics B, Farkas R, Åkesson A (2010b) An unexpected advantage of whiteness in horses: the most horsefly-proof horse has a depolarizing white coat. Proc R Soc B 277:1643–1650CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Horváth G, Kriska G, Malik P, Hegedüs R, Neumann L, Åkesson S, Robertson B (2010c) Asphalt surfaces as ecological traps for water-seeking polarotactic insects: how can the polarized light pollution of asphalt surfaces be reduced? Series: Environmental Remediation Technologies, Regulations and Safety. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Hauppauge, p 47. ISBN: 978-1-61668-863-9Google Scholar
  26. Horváth G, Móra A, Bernáth B, Kriska G (2011) Polarotaxis in non-biting midges: female chironomids are attracted to horizontally polarized light. Physiol Behav 104:1010–1015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. IEA (2014) Technology roadmap: solar photovoltaic energy. International Energy Agency, Paris. http://www.iea.org/publications/. Retrieved 7 Oct 2014
  28. Kagan A, Viner TC, Trail PW, Espinoza EO (2014) Avian mortality at solar energy facilities in Southern California: A preliminary analysis. National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, AshlandGoogle Scholar
  29. Kang TS, Smith AP, Taylor BE, Durstock MF (2009) Fabrication of highly-ordered TiO2 nanotube arrays and their use in dye-sensitized solar cells. Nano Lett 9:601–606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kim J (2007) Formation of a porous silicon anti-reflection layer for a silicon solar cell. J Korean Phys Soc 50:1168–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kokko H, Sutherland WJ (2001) Ecological traps in changing environments: ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect. Evol Ecol Res 3:537–551Google Scholar
  32. Krcmar S (2013) Comparison of the efficiency of the olfactory and visual traps in the collection of horseflies (Diptera: Tabanidae). Entomol Gener 34:261–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krcmar S, Lajos P (2011) Response of horse flies to aged equine urine (Diptera: Tabanidae). Entomol Gener 33:245–250Google Scholar
  34. Kriska G, Horváth G, Andrikovics S (1998) Why do mayflies lay their eggs en masse on dry asphalt roads? Water-imitating polarized light reflected from asphalt attracts Ephemeroptera. J Exp Biol 201:2273–2286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Kriska G, Bernáth B, Horváth G (2007) Positive polarotaxis in a mayfly that never leaves the water surface: polarotactic water detection in Palingenia longicauda (Ephemeroptera). Naturwissenschaften 94:148–154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kriska G, Malik P, Szivák I, Horváth G (2008) Glass buildings on river banks as “polarized light traps” for mass-swarming polarotactic caddis flies. Naturwissenschaften 95:461–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Kriska G, Bernáth B, Farkas R, Horváth G (2009) Degrees of polarization of reflected light eliciting polarotaxis in dragonflies (Odonata), mayflies (Ephemeroptera) and tabanid flies (Tabanidae). J Insect Physiol 55:1167–1173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Kuo ML, Poxson DJ, Kim YS, Mont FW, Kim JK, Schubert FE, Lin SY (2008) Realization of a near-perfect antireflection coating for silicon solar energy utilization. Opt Lett 33:2527–2529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Muheim R (2011) Behavioural and physiological mechanisms of polarized light sensitivity in birds. Philos Trans R Soc B 366:763–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Robertson BA, Rehage J, Sih A (2013) Ecological novelty and the emergence of evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evol 28:552–560CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW (2002) Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evol 17:474–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schwind R (1991) Polarization vision in water insects and insects living on a moist substrate. J Comp Physiol A 169:531–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwind R (1995) Spectral regions in which aquatic insects see reflected polarized light. J Comp Physiol A 177:439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Walston LJ, Rollins KE, Smith KP, LaGory KE, Sinclair K, Turchi C, Wendelin T, Souder H (2015) A review of avian monitoring and mitigation information at existing utility scale solar facilities. Argonne National Laboratory, U. S. Department of Energy, ArgonneCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zar JH (2010) Biostatistical analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dénes Száz
    • 1
  • Dávid Mihályi
    • 1
  • Alexandra Farkas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ádám Egri
    • 1
    • 2
  • András Barta
    • 1
    • 3
  • György Kriska
    • 2
    • 4
  • Bruce Robertson
    • 5
  • Gábor Horváth
    • 1
  1. 1.Environmental Optics Laboratory, Department of Biological Physics, Physical InstituteEötvös UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Danube Research InstituteMTA Centre for Ecological ResearchBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Estrato Research and Development Ltd.BudapestHungary
  4. 4.Group for Methodology in Biology Teaching, Biological InstituteEötvös UniversityBudapestHungary
  5. 5.Division of Science, Mathematics and ComputingBard CollegeAnnandale-on-HudsonUSA

Personalised recommendations