# Community impact from solar farm mismanagement



## jharkin (May 1, 2015)

This is an issue that become a big controversy around here, so Id like to hear what you folks think.

First off - I am very much in favor of building out as much solar as we can.  The more the better.

The issue- A large solar contractor made a deal with my town to purchase a piece of land bordering a nature preserve and rail trail to build a solar farm.  There where clearly laid out boundaries of what ares could be cut for the farm. Thing is, the contractor just want ahead and clear cut trees far beyond the boundaries they owned in violation of the contract.  It was reported they send tree crews in on a weekend, trespassed onto town land, ripped out all the surveyor stakes and hid them in the deep woods and cut 100 fully mature trees. In the process a section of the rail trail was destroyed by there equipment.

They where caught of course, and rather than go to court in a battle estimated to cost over a million, they made a deal with the town to pay 175k in damages to fund replanting the trees and rebuilding the trail. Also they where to build a parking lot for community access to the trail and pledge 20 years of funding for annual maintenance of the landscaping around the site.

This all happened a year ago, and as it stands today the solar contractor still has not signed the agreement to make reparations. Its become an uproar at town meeting with locals pushing the board of selectmen to shut them down or take them to court. Meanwhile the solar is online and they are taking their profits.







A couple of the electrical subcontractors who worked the project have testified that this is par for the course with all these large solar companies. They make a deal to not touch trees in order to get land purchases approved, knowing the cells wont get enough light. Then they deliberately do illegal cuts and just pay the fine. The contractors testified that the job foreman's tell the crews to "not be bullied by inspectors" and just get it up and running and get out.


This behavior makes me angry. I fear its going to take a very good thing - solar - and create such a bad reputation with the public that starting new projects will get harder and harder. And then we just end up back on FF.



thoughts?


----------



## Ashful (May 1, 2015)

That's upsetting.  A similar thing happened on a property that boarders my own, on a smaller scale, cutting trees adjacent to my property to build a house.  They deliberately cut more than was approved, knowing that once the damage was done...

Your next move likely depends on the timing of your next election cycle.  You need to get a few high-profile business owners on board with your cause, and start spreading the word.  Petitions do carry weight at the local level.

Then again, I won't be upset if you go back to buying FF's.  I have no substantial investments in solar.


----------



## jharkin (May 1, 2015)

Just to clarify, this didn't happen on my land - its on town land a few miles from me.  the contractor is selling the power directly to the local utility (Eversource, formerly NStar) in this case.   I might get some of the power indirectly - but most of my usage comes out of the coal and NG fired New England grid.

There is an ex-selectman who is leading the charge to bring this up at town meeting and push the selectmen to take action.


My concerns is more general that I want to see more responsible addition of renewable to the grid to get us off fossil fuels for environmental and energy security reasons, while still being considerate of the local landscape.  Im not concerned about what investors I do or dont make rich.


----------



## Ashful (May 1, 2015)

You're focusing only on my last paragraph, made in jest.  What sort of local support has your ex-selectman been able to drum up?


----------



## jharkin (May 1, 2015)

Touche'.. I was just having a poke at ya'

Support is to be seen. They ran articles on this in the town paper last week and the annual town meeting is coming up next week.

I'm curious to hear if others have seen situations like this or its just a phenomenon in my area (doubt it).


----------



## semipro (May 1, 2015)

So who scrounged the firewood? 
This from the Simpsons when Mr. Burns blocked sunlight to Springfield.




It would be great if the town could build such a thing to block sunlight to the panels.  I'd bet the scoundrels would sign the reparation agreement then.

Seriously though, something like requiring a performance bond or escrow set up by the contractor before groundbreaking would prevent this sort of thing.


----------



## Dune (May 1, 2015)

This opens a larger issue, one I used to laugh about but now see as a major emerging problem with these field of solar panels being ground mounted;
The energy generated cannot offset the carbon that was collected by the trees which were cut down. 
These things ideally are placed on roofs. No trees grow there. 
Other local installs (on ground) which I approve of; along the airport runways where the ground is kept clear anyway. There are massive fields of solar panels at the Hyannis Airport.
Atop landfills. Again, this land is kept clear anyway. The town of Dennis installed acres of panels atop their former landfill. 

The town of Yarmouth topped the town hall (1/2) with solar panels. The panels provide 1/2 of the needs of the building (another pet peeve, use *all *the space.

The Community College (Cape Cod) Cleared land around the campus despite having hundreds of acres of roof space. *WRONG.*


----------



## begreen (May 1, 2015)

Loggers taking more than their staked out share is not uncommon. It is speculated that over-logging may have contributed to the massive Oso mudslide last year that took the lives of 43 people.

In this thread's case I am not sure why the solar company is liable and not the loggers.


----------



## Cynnergy (May 2, 2015)

Keep pushing the town.  Those who shout loudest get the most attention.  Be persistent.  You can make a difference, especially at the local level.  If the trees get in the way of the solar farm, they should pay for planting elsewhere in the town, and possibly for the town to purchase land if necessary for areas to plant.  Compensation for woodland destruction can be replanting anything from double the area to ten times the area.  1:1 is NOT acceptable - trees don't grow fast enough to make that meaningful compensation for the loss.

I'm not sure about solar farms in particular, but this is incredibly common in development in general.  Local people keeping a watchful eye out are the only reason many of these things ever get reported.


----------



## woodgeek (May 2, 2015)

Sucks. Sounds slimy, and y'all should make them pay their fines...but

1) the PV will v likely offset more CO2 than the trees that were lost.  Probably even on a differential shading basis.  Cutting is prob a net environmental positive re CO2.
2) anyone in the town with solar expertise could have flagged the tree shading as an issue when the project was proposed, and guessed the resolution.
3) the trees did not feel any pain.


----------



## billb3 (May 8, 2015)

Our town has 177  solar projects with the capacity to produce 26.7 megawatts .
Due to a Con Edison Industrial project that was pretty much shoved down residents throats in 2012, a Town bylaw was amended (too late after it was enacted allowing the project in the first place ) so that no more Industrial project could be built on  resident districts and no more sneaking them thru without public hearings  and public notices.
Has made it difficult for subsequent projects especially if neighbors object . 
Town has peaked though for solar installs as there is little more than  resident and business roofs left to build on.


----------



## CaptSpiff (May 13, 2015)

Another slight thread tangent: Our Long Island towns in the east are struggling (fighting) with farmers who want to lease land space to solar developers. Farm land is vanishing, so it gets very special protection and tax considerations, but now finds itself in a catch-22. The farmers say they can get revenue by turning their least productive soil into Solar Farms. Town rules state that is a non-conforming function. Strange bedfellows on that fight.


----------



## DougA (May 13, 2015)

I don't think sticking a middle finger up to gov't authority is something confined to solar projects.  I've seen lots of businesses do illegal things and risk paying a fine if they are ever caught. The only difference here is that people associate solar companies as being morally good companies because they are supposedly providing a benefit to the earth.  In my own experience, they have some of the worst snake oil mgmt. there is.  They are in it for the fast buck.  I'm sure there are some good and morally responsible solar companies, perhaps I have not found them yet.


----------



## jeffesonm (May 18, 2015)

There is a project in the works to clear cut 90 acres of forest in southern NJ to install a massive solar field:  http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/...r-90-acre-forest-to-build-massive-solar-farm/


----------



## begreen (May 18, 2015)

Dudes, what self-serving, backward thinking. Do it over the parking lot or on your buildings. It will provide shade for the cars as well as provide solar.


----------



## CaptSpiff (May 19, 2015)

Suffolk County, LI, NY went "all in" on having car-port solar arrays installed at many of their large muni lots (court complexes, county campus, LIRR parking lots) back in 2011:

http://archive.longislandpress.com/2010/01/19/suffolk-county-parking-lots-carports-go-solar/

http://www.lipower.org/powering/solar-enxco.html

Did a pretty good job of keeping the contractor on schedule and budget. Taxpayer response was very favorable; lots of backslapping all around:

http://www.suffolkcountyny.gov/Departments/EconomicDevelopmentandPlanning/Energy.aspx

Then the pesky "law of unintended consequences" reared its ugly head:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/01...k-county-solar-panels-causing-damage-to-cars/

Still think it's a great idea, and should be reproduced everywhere. Just need to work the details out!


----------



## begreen (May 19, 2015)

Note that in the image posted the design appears to take this into account.


----------



## maple1 (May 21, 2015)

begreen said:


> Note that in the image posted the design appears to take this into account.


 

Where is that - does it snow there? Looks like they would load all up with it & become useless until it all melts.


----------



## begreen (May 21, 2015)

Not sure, but here is a company specializing in these installations. They show many NJ installations which is where the park plans to clear cut forests. I would think they would be fine for the occasional snows in southern Jersey. The park is mostly after summer production anyway according to the article and closed in winter.
http://solairegeneration.com/


----------

