The "either-or" choice is unacceptable
By Frank Carini / ecoRI News
columnist
A recent report determined Massachusetts’ existing solar-siting
policies are counterproductive, haphazard, and need to be revised.
There’s good news for the Bay State, though. Rhode Island
is still doing a lousier job when it comes to managing solar development.
A rapid transition to cleaner electric power is
imperative for meeting Massachusetts’ commitment to net-zero greenhouse gas
emissions by 2050, according to the Growing Solar, Protecting Nature
report released last month.
But, like in Rhode Island, much of Massachusetts’
renewable energy development has been shortsighted.
“Solar energy in all its forms — rooftops, canopies, and
ground-mount systems — must play a major role in this transition,” according to
the report co-authored by Mass Audubon and Harvard Forest. “The absolute
urgency of the climate crisis, however, does not justify sacrificing our
natural and working lands to make way for ground-mount solar. We can have our
forests, working lands, and solar, too.”
The lead to the Oct. 2 press release announcing the report’s publication read: “The current siting of large, ground-mount solar development poses a clear threat to vital forests and farmlands in Massachusetts. But developing more solar energy to meet clean energy goals doesn’t have to come at the expense of these critical habitats.”
The comprehensive report noted that by shifting from
utility-scale ground-mounted solar arrays on open space to solar panels on
rooftops, over parking lots, and on already-developed lands, Massachusetts
could meet its goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 while
simultaneously protecting forests and farmlands.
Massachusetts has lost more than 5,000 acres of forest
and prime farmland to solar projects since 2010, according to the report.
During the past 13 years, more than 500 ground-mounted solar projects have been
developed, covering some 8,000 acres, of which about 60% had been forested.
In Rhode Island, some 1,100 acres of forest have been cleared during the past six years to make room for ground-mounted solar arrays. That’s when the state, under the leadership of then-Gov. Gina Raimondo, called for more renewable energy.
The state, however, offered no real plan for how to
wisely incorporate solar energy into the landscape. State officials didn’t
adequately communicate with municipal officials and municipal officials seldom
communicated with each other. The result was a Wild West approach to renewable
energy siting.
Some developers bullied their way in, left a trail of
open space destruction, and were routinely cited for environmental
noncompliance.
A similar scenario is playing out in Massachusetts.
“We need to think not only about how many acres we’re
using for solar development, but also which acres are being developed,” said
Jonathan Thompson, senior ecologist at Harvard Forest and the report’s
co-principal researcher. “Our core forests are incredibly valuable for wildlife
habitat, biodiversity, and carbon storage, and we must do everything we can to
protect them from further fragmentation.”
The release of the Mass Audubon/Harvard Forest report
dovetailed with Gov. Maura Healey’s executive order to
create biodiversity goals for Massachusetts.
Among the report’s key points included:
Current solar development trends would cause the
loss of 6.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050 — roughly equivalent
to the annual CO₂ emissions of the city of Boston.
By protecting the most valuable natural and working
lands from development, Massachusetts could produce enough solar energy to meet
our greenhouse gas emission goals, while preserving 76% more forest carbon than
our current trajectory would predict and protecting nearly 100% of our
remaining essential wildlife habitat and prime farmland.
Massachusetts’ rooftops and parking lots alone could
support up to 30 gigawatts of solar, and sites with low impacts to nature and
farms could support another 25 gigawatts.
“Before we cut any more trees to build solar, Massachusetts needs to cover every parking lot, rooftop, and capped landfill with solar to protect the precious trees that absorb carbon dioxide and provide habitat to wildlife, as well as desperately needed cooling shade and flood protection,” said Phil Coupe, co-founder of ReVision Energy.
“Solar canopies on
parking lots reduce urban heat, shelter drivers from the elements, and generate
zero-emission solar electricity that can power electric vehicles and nearby
buildings.”
The report also made several policy recommendations,
including:
- Eliminate state incentives for solar projects on valuable natural and working lands while increasing incentives for solar on rooftops and already-developed lands.
- Invest in reducing the labor and permitting costs of rooftop and canopy solar projects.
- Support large-scale landowners in building solar on rooftops and near existing transmission infrastructure.
- Launch a statewide planning effort to integrate renewable energy and transmission infrastructure into the process of land development.
“One of the goals of this work is to broaden how we think about the costs and benefits of the clean energy transition and what we need to fight climate change,” said Michelle Manion, vice president for policy and advocacy at Mass Audubon and the report’s co-principal researcher.
“Our results are clear: when we place real value on
nature’s contribution to the fight against climate change and protection of
biodiversity, the path forward with the lowest costs is the one that solves for
both clean energy and nature.”
A 2020 report found
the Ocean State could produce a greater amount of electricity than it consumes
by installing solar arrays on more roofs, landfills, brownfields, gravel pits,
and parking lots.
When it was released, open space advocates said the
report, titled “Solar Siting Opportunities for Rhode Island,” proved that
woodlands, meadows, and farmland don’t need to be cleared and covered to meet
state renewable energy objectives and climate emission reduction efforts.
Perhaps, before it’s too late, elected officials in both
states will stop the unnecessary sacrifice of the natural world to procure more
renewable energy. Of course, such a development shift makes too much sense and
not enough cents.
Note: To watch a video presentation of the October
report, click here.
Frank Carini can be reached at frank@ecori.org. His
opinions don’t reflect those of ecoRI News.
