Fighting 'Solar Farm' Installation

[pmsmechanic]

Didn’t Europe, Germany, etc. try wind and solar and now they’re firing up coal plants again?

I beleive they also have NG ones too. They tried to buy NG from us to replace Russian NG but our ever so wise prime minister turned them down. So now they are buying NG from Australia and some Arab states instead.

I edited this to remove a political comment because I don't want the thread shut down.

 

[kenmbz]

Even the nuclear people point out that waste disposal is an ever growing problem. From their marketing site: What is nuclear waste and what do we do with it? - World Nuclear Association

And who says the oil industry does not get its share of subsidies, like not paying taxes in the US.
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute found that the US government alone spends $20 billion every year on direct fossil fuel subsidies. Of that figure, around $16 billion goes towards oil and gas, while the remaining $4 billion benefits the coal industry.

All of the energy groups are taking us for a ride, not just the "green" ones.

Can you imagine if all these subsidies were put to educating the poor in trades (and not into politicians pockets) we could reduce welfare and handouts.

 

[Hay Dude]

Even the nuclear people point out that waste disposal is an ever growing problem. From their marketing site: What is nuclear waste and what do we do with it? - World Nuclear Association

And who says the oil industry does not get its share of subsidies, like not paying taxes in the US.
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute found that the US government alone spends $20 billion every year on direct fossil fuel subsidies. Of that figure, around $16 billion goes towards oil and gas, while the remaining $4 billion benefits the coal industry.

All of the energy groups are taking us for a ride, not just the "green" ones.

Can you imagine if all these subsidies were put to educating the poor in trades (and not into politicians pockets) we could reduce welfare and handouts.

While we all know there’s subsidies for many industries, certain industries receive a lot more subsidy than others. “Favoritism” - you know, like the brother who gets more than the other siblings?

After seeing the latest budgets, we can clearly see green energy is the favorite sibling, while fossil fuel energy is penalized.

The G_______t is once again picking winners and losers. While it seems great to prop up an industry, like the auto industry to save it or green energy to get it started, it rarely ends well. Our automakers are now indebted or beholden to the G________t and will have to take orders from them.

 

[LouNY]

You clearly did not and still do not because you still believe battery backup on grid tie PV is forbidden.

If you were half as smart as you seem to think you are you'd be damned smart.
Go back and read the last paragraph in my reply, some people can make a stump seem intelligent.

 

[kenmbz]

While we all know there’s subsidies for many industries, certain industries receive a lot more subsidy than others. “Favoritism” - you know, like the brother who gets more than the other siblings?

After seeing the latest budgets, we can clearly see green energy is the favorite sibling, while fossil fuel energy is penalized.

The G_______t is once again picking winners and losers. While it seems great to prop up an industry, like the auto industry to save it or green energy to get it started, it rarely ends well. Our automakers are now indebted or beholden to the G________t and will have to take orders from them.

Someone once told me to invest in whatever the gov seemed to favor.
Done well with that so far, wonder why that is

 

[riptides]

Just got public notice on a 500 acre proposed Solar Farm 2 miles down the road from me AND a 66 acre proposed data center (1.4m sq ft) 1 mile up the road.

LOL.

Neither will serve my community. Both sit on "good farmland". Both have infrastructure tie in. Although the datacenter may need a substation and a mile or two for the feed lines into the grid.

Our existing power company "upgraded" their lines in this area a few years ago. Their version of an upgrade expanded tower height and doubled up on the towers to hand 230kv transmissions. That did not go over well with the county, community or residents that had to deal with that. But you know those ROWS don't have a lot of regulations on what some actions can take place on them.

With that "upgrade", these farmlands will become prime targets for industrial zoning changes.

I imagine both landowners will or have cashed in and are out of here.

 

[Muhammad]

A handful of posts have crossed over into political opinions. Please keep the politics out of this thread so we can keep it open.

 

[Hay Dude]

The more farmland goes into solar panels, the more food prices will increase and the more food we will be forced to import.
Feels like someday this once beautiful country will be covered in solar panels & windmills in many areas.

What a bleak and depressing future.

 

[walhondingMF]

The more farmland goes into solar panels, the more food prices will increase and the more food we will be forced to import.
Feels like someday this once beautiful country will be covered in solar panels & windmills in many areas.

What a bleak and depressing future.

I can agree with you partially on that sentiment. However, a large number of wind farms are in crop land regions of the country where agriculture is still happening under them. Covering up good farm land with a solar panel is not the most ideal way to make it agriculturally productive but, like stated previously, some farmers are finding ways to raise things like sheep on that ground. In many situations, allowing wind or solar on their farm land is a profit increase. Until the farmer can make more money JUST farming their land, they will always have to look for additional income options.
I live close to The Wilds, a type of large scale zoo in Ohio. Its basically a huge grassland. You know why it's only grassland? Because when they mined for coal here, they ruined the agricultural productivity of the land.
Just a few miles south of me, in Noble county, several thousand acres of privately owned rural ground is being strip mined. Most of the mineral rights were sold prior to the current land owners purchasing their land. They have zero say. The coal company has already sold this coal, but not in America. It has already been bought by China.
Are there smarter places to put solar panels and wind turbines, absolutely. But my diversifying America's energy production options, we decrease dependence. The farm that is struggling gets some additional income and their land is still productive to them. The natural gas boom in my area has been a God send for all of the land owners in our area, and it has a minimal impact, at least from an extraction stand point. None of them are perfect (we may not have perfect energy production until I am an old man with fusion), but some are better options than others.
Also, IMO, urban sprawl is the greatest threat to farm land. Just drive around Columbus, Ohio if you want a perfect example of that.

 

[MossRoad]

The True Land Footprint of Solar Energy

In communities with active solar development, there is often debate about how utility-scale solar might affect existing land uses or natural resources.

betterenergy.org

 

[MossRoad]

...
Also, IMO, urban sprawl is the greatest threat to farm land. Just drive around Columbus, Ohio if you want a perfect example of that.

When I was a kid, we used to visit Cincinnati quite often. In the 70's it started spreading north towards Dayton. Today... you can't recognize that area. I believe I read about 10 years ago it was the 2nd fasted growing area in the U.S., only being behind the Raleigh/Durham area.

 

[Hay Dude]

I can agree with you partially on that sentiment. However, a large number of wind farms are in crop land regions of the country where agriculture is still happening under them. Covering up good farm land with a solar panel is not the most ideal way to make it agriculturally productive but, like stated previously, some farmers are finding ways to raise things like sheep on that ground. In many situations, allowing wind or solar on their farm land is a profit increase. Until the farmer can make more money JUST farming their land, they will always have to look for additional income options.
I live close to The Wilds, a type of large scale zoo in Ohio. Its basically a huge grassland. You know why it's only grassland? Because when they mined for coal here, they ruined the agricultural productivity of the land.
Just a few miles south of me, in Noble county, several thousand acres of privately owned rural ground is being strip mined. Most of the mineral rights were sold prior to the current land owners purchasing their land. They have zero say. The coal company has already sold this coal, but not in America. It has already been bought by China.
Are there smarter places to put solar panels and wind turbines, absolutely. But my diversifying America's energy production options, we decrease dependence. The farm that is struggling gets some additional income and their land is still productive to them. The natural gas boom in my area has been a God send for all of the land owners in our area, and it has a minimal impact, at least from an extraction stand point. None of them are perfect (we may not have perfect energy production until I am an old man with fusion), but some are better options than others.
Also, IMO, urban sprawl is the greatest threat to farm land. Just drive around Columbus, Ohio if you want a perfect example of that.

I totally get “highest & best use” of land. If solar rent pays more than crops, what farmer wouldn’t shed his equipment and rent his land.
Once you cover land with solar panels, it sharply limits options. “Raising sheep” is such a micro-ag industry. VERY few farmers would want to drop hay or row crops and pick up 500 sheep to make a living.
If we mine coal here and sell it to China, what have we accomplished? Seems to me mining coal is mining coal, no matter who it gets sold to. If we continue to mine coal here and send it to China then they pollute the atmosphere and continue the greenhouse gasses, then what on earth has been saved? If we were resolutely committed to reducing “global climate change”, then we would stop mining and selling coal, especially if it goes to China, since they don’t care about smokestack emissions. After all, they are a “developing nation”, right?

Natural gas and Nukes are the answer, but the environmentalist religious cult makes the rules now.

 

[walhondingMF]

"Natural gas and Nukes are the answer, but the environmentalist religious cult makes the rules now."

I do not disagree with the implication that natural gas and nuclear 2 sources of energy production for a diverse energy system. However, nuclear has an extremely high overhead, especially because the newer systems used now to prevent human error are very costly. I'm sorry, but I do not want a nuclear reactor built by the lowest bidder or by companies looking for a profit over safety. And talk about reducing property value...

The "Environmentalist Religious Cult" has done nothing around here to inhibit the natural gas industry. It's actually the opposite. One of the largest natural gas energy production facilities in the country was just completed 4 miles from my house. It's also the most energy efficient and cleanest fossil fuel burning technology available. The legislation encouraged this type of system. Same company is starting one about 30 miles north of here now. But this isn't perfect. The property value for anyone within eye sight of the facility just had property value drop drastically. I can also hear it running at my house several miles away.

We just simply need to face it... A diversity of energy options is the best option. Use what works where you are. Here, we have natural gas, in California they have sunshine and in Texas they have wind. The coal and oil industry are only pushing a narrative about them being penalized and alternatives being pushed because they do not hold a monopoly on energy production anymore. It just so happens to be the first time the alternative sector has equal legislative power. The technology is finally competitive, consumers want it, and its a stupid idea to ship coal all over the country just because the coal industry dominated since the 40's and 50's.

 

[Hay Dude]

"Natural gas and Nukes are the answer, but the environmentalist religious cult makes the rules now."

I do not disagree with the implication that natural gas and nuclear 2 sources of energy production for a diverse energy system. However, nuclear has an extremely high overhead, especially because the newer systems used now to prevent human error are very costly. I'm sorry, but I do not want a nuclear reactor built by the lowest bidder or by companies looking for a profit over safety. And talk about reducing property value...

The "Environmentalist Religious Cult" has done nothing around here to inhibit the natural gas industry. It's actually the opposite. One of the largest natural gas energy production facilities in the country was just completed 4 miles from my house. It's also the most energy efficient and cleanest fossil fuel burning technology available. The legislation encouraged this type of system. Same company is starting one about 30 miles north of here now. But this isn't perfect. The property value for anyone within eye sight of the facility just had property value drop drastically. I can also hear it running at my house several miles away.

We just simply need to face it... A diversity of energy options is the best option. Use what works where you are. Here, we have natural gas, in California they have sunshine and in Texas they have wind. The coal and oil industry are only pushing a narrative about them being penalized and alternatives being pushed because they do not hold a monopoly on energy production anymore. It just so happens to be the first time the alternative sector has equal legislative power. The technology is finally competitive, consumers want it, and it’s a stupid idea to ship coal all over the country just because the coal industry dominated since the 40's and 50's.

I’m sorry, but the new energy alternative is competitive because we are giving them billions, if not trillions in taxpayer support to make them that way.

Nuke plant construction might be given to lowest bidder, but the mechanical engineering minimum standards insure that minimum acceptable safety requirements are achieved by all bidders.

Just like a set of blueprints for a house, if the architect requires 2x6 walls and 5/8” wall sheathing, any bidder who specifies 2x4 studs or 1/2” wall sheathing will be rejected.

Once we get out population informed that the world isn’t going to end in 9 years, the green environmentalists will hopefully get their emotions under control and we can return to sanity and use what we have here to produce affordable energy rather than overpriced, unreliable, taxpayer subsidized alternative energy.
Then we can once again compete with other nations without racking up trillions in national debt. THAT could be our most crippling problem we face.

 

[walhondingMF]

I’m sorry, but the new energy alternative is competitive because we are giving them billions, if not trillions in taxpayer support to make them that way.

I'm sorry but what do you think we have been doing for the coal and oil companies for the last 70 years. Again, tax dollars are going to the alternative options more now then before because they are better now then they were before. Tax dollars are going to natural gas more in Ohio and Pennsylvania now because it's a better option here now. The industry decided that, not the government That's how the federal government works.
I am not going to argue about what good things and bad things the federal government puts our money into, because I am sure there are many things you and I would agree on in that. However, there is not one penny of my tax money that I would want to go to the coal industry (unless it is to pay for the pensions the owners have tried to not give to the life long coal miners that earned them). It's a dying industry in our country and it's been dying for the last 20 years. I want my tax dollars to go to the future for my son, and diversifying energy production to decrease dependence is a good idea.

Nuke plant construction might be given to lowest bidder, but the mechanical engineering minimum standards insure that minimum acceptable safety requirements are achieved by all bidders.

And the minimum standard costs too much now, so capitalism says it's a bad investment. Most countries that use large amounts of nuclear are using government run systems.

Once we get out population informed that the world isn’t going to end in 9 years, the green environmentalists will hopefully get their emotions under control and we can return to sanity and use what we have here to produce affordable energy rather than overpriced, unreliable, taxpayer subsidized alternative energy.

We do not need to debate the rate of climate change (9 years to the end is a bit drastic) but a lot is changing and I'm more worried about 30 years from now. I would ask though that you show me some evidence that the alternative energies are overpriced and unreliable still? Texas had an energy crisis because their fossil fuel system failed, not the alternatives. Since, Texas has increased funding to alternative to be more diverse.

 

[Bill Guenthner]

I totally get “highest & best use” of land. If solar rent pays more than crops, what farmer wouldn’t shed his equipment and rent his land.
Once you cover land with solar panels, it sharply limits options. “Raising sheep” is such a micro-ag industry. VERY few farmers would want to drop hay or row crops and pick up 500 sheep to make a living.
If we mine coal here and sell it to China, what have we accomplished? Seems to me mining coal is mining coal, no matter who it gets sold to. If we continue to mine coal here and send it to China then they pollute the atmosphere and continue the greenhouse gasses, then what on earth has been saved? If we were resolutely committed to reducing “global climate change”, then we would stop mining and selling coal, especially if it goes to China, since they don’t care about smokestack emissions. After all, they are a “developing nation”, right?

Natural gas and Nukes are the answer, but the environmentalist religious cult makes the rules now.

Wind, solar and hydro generation produces 20% of US electricity. Wind and solar will account for 60% of added generation capacity in the US this year. Nuclear power plants generate 18% of power with that figure declining rapidly. Five nuclear plants were shuttered in the last two years. Renewable energy is the path we are on.

 

[K5lwq]

It is kinda funny that there is such animosity towards using natural resources to our advantage. Farms used windmills long ago before electricity. We have used hydropower for quite a long time and you hear very few complaints about that.

Of course I think fossil fuels as a natural resource as well. Use it all and any of it if you want.

 

[two_bit_score]

Renewable energy is the path we are on.

Unfortunately we probably are not on it because it makes economic sense. Only for political reasons.

 

[Jstpssng]

I would not put marijuana in the same category as alcohol, coke, heroin, LSD.

Marijuana usage by humans dates back Before Christ

So does alcohol. Even Christ was reputed to have turned water into wine.

 

[two_bit_score]

So does alcohol.

Wine existed before that miracle happened. I’d bet cocaine and heroin were ancient remedies for certain ailments for many years B.C.