Solar energy has experienced an average annual growth rate of 24% in the last decade. The majority of this growth is due to the rising number of solar farms in the United States. These solar farms and other means of solar power, such as rooftop panels, have allowed enough solar energy to power 30 million homes. According to the Solar Energy
Industries Association, this is because of federal policies like the Solar Investment Tax Credit, rapidly declining costs, and increased demand for clean electricity across the private and public sectors. These factors, among others, have increased the nation’s capacity for solar energy to 162 gigawatts (GW).
Suppose solar is a clean source of renewable energy. Why are so many people against installing solar farms in Clarendon County? Well, there are a few negative aspects of solar farming. The most prominent reason here is that they can disrupt wildlife habitats and use up a lot of valuable land formerly utilized for agricultural purposes. Although certain types of crops can coexist with solar farms, the whole point of solar panels is that they block out and absorb almost all direct sunlight; therefore, many traditional crops will not grow beneath solar panels. Furthermore, the added complexity of putting a large amount of massive overhanging panels in an agricultural area. Solar panels require underground wiring, and the fragile tempered glass panels make this sort of farming incompatible with tractors or plows.
They also rarely generate the power they are said to produce, sometimes as little as one-tenth of what was proposed.
Solar farms are a net drain in many cases, costing more money than they profit.
It is no mystery why the topic of solar farms has come up at recent Clarendon County Planning Commission and Council meetings. On Wednesday, Jan. 3, the Clarendon County Planning Commission held a special meeting where members discussed submitting an ordinance concerning solar farms to the county council. That said, any pending solar farm applications before Jan. 3 would still be reviewed and processed. Members voted unanimously in favor of an ordinance to protect county farmland. For the purpose of review, the planning commission forwarded a recommendation to the county council that a moratorium be approved pending a possible amended solar ordinance.
Following the Clarendon County Planning Commission meeting, the Clarendon County Council met on Monday, Jan. 8, and during their meeting, they discussed the proposed moratorium at length. Council members listened to four public comments concerning solar farms. Moye Graham of the Clarendon County Republican Party expressed that he believes the solar farms will negatively affect the community. Graham shared his concern and many Clarendon County residents’ concerns about the future waste resulting from these pending solar farms and the cost of cleanup if they are no longer in use.
“Who is going to pay for this,” Graham said, “who is going to revitalize the land to what it used to be?. The land will probably not even be able to be used for farming ever again, either,” Graham said.
Citizens for Responsible Solar have listed ten reasons why industrial-scale solar isn’t suitable for agricultural-rural areas on their website, www.citizensforresponsiblesolar.org. The second item on that list reads, “The land (forest, farmland, vegetation, soil) is forever destroyed.” Despite the discussions regarding decommissioning, their reasoning for adding this to the list is that the rural land will be lost forever. The grading, pile driving, blasting, electric cable trenching, and road construction will compact the soil, likely delaying agricultural use for years after the project’s end.
Several farmers spoke at the council meeting about their concerns for agricultural land. Troy Allen, a Clarendon County native, expressed his appreciation for the planning commission’s recommendation of the moratorium to slow things down. According to Allen, “We have to look at the long-term position, how it affects land use, how it affects property owners, the watershed, how it affects the ecosystem.”
Two more members of the public spoke, Jose Calvo and David Christmas, and they listed a few of the harsh chemicals solar farms can release to farms and surrounding land.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains that some solar panels are considered hazardous waste, and some are not, even within the same model and manufacturer. Different solar panel varieties have different metals in the semiconductor and solder. Some of these metals, including lead and cadmium, are harmful to human health and the environment at high levels. Solar panel waste could be considered hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act if these metals are present in high enough quantities.
That said, this is only a potential problem during manufacture and after the disposal of solar panels. The panels do not actively release waste into the environment unless they are being built or broken.
After public comments, Chairman Dwight Stewart mentioned they included the moratorium on the agenda. He felt that council members agreed with the public opinion, “I can confidently say we also have concerns regarding the solar farms,” the chairman said. Once the approval of the agenda item was put to a vote, council members unanimously voted in favor of the moratorium. This will provide a temporary halt of 90 days to new solar farm applications, which will go into effect immediately. The temporary halt will allow the planning commission to review the ordinance and make any necessary amendments.
