B2
THE ASTORIAN • TuESdAy, JuNE 15, 2021
Agriculture, solar energy competition heats up
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
BONANZA — Nobody is against solar
energy — at least, not in theory.
Solar power is often cast in a positive light
until a specific site is chosen for a facility.
At that point, the proposed development
can seem like a dark force to neighbors who
fear the unsightly transformation of their
familiar landscape.
“What’s it going to do to my property val-
ues when I’m right next to it?” asked Greg
Thomas, whose farm abuts a proposed 2,733-
acre solar project near Bonanza.
“All our property values are going to
go in the toilet. Nobody wants to live next
to a power plant,” answered Tonya Pinck-
ney, another neighbor opposed to the facility
planned by developer Hecate Energy.
Local hostility to solar facilities isn’t just
a knee-jerk not in my backyard sentiment in
Oregon, a state known for its rigorous pro-
tections against converting farmland to other
uses.
Opponents of solar facilities are often
strongly motivated by concern for the agricul-
tural economy, which can permanently suf-
fer if irrigated acres such as those within the
Bonanza project are developed.
“Why do we have zoning laws?” Pinckney
asked. “If it’s zoned for ag, how can they just
take it out?”
About 600 acres of the project are irrigated
and half the associated water rights can’t be
transferred elsewhere due to a lack of avail-
able farmland, meaning that capacity could be
lost forever, said Dave Noble, a local farmer.
“That is some top-notch farm ground for
this area,” he said.
Competing goals
Aside from preserving agriculture, Oregon
strives to be a leader in promoting renewable
energy to reduce carbon emissions and fight
climate change.
Those two objectives are bound to clash as
solar energy production takes off in the state,
propelled by economic forces as the technol-
ogy becomes less expensive to manufacture
and install.
While it’s long been boosted by tax cred-
its, renewable portfolio mandates and other
government incentives, the solar power indus-
try has now found its financial footing and is
expanding due to demand from utility compa-
nies, experts say.
“The market is driving the boom,” said
Mark Zwieg, Hecate Energy’s development
manager in charge of the Bonanza project
and other proposals. “Our cost of materials is
going down every year.”
A lower cost of construction is also spur-
Mateusz Perkowski/Capital Press
Dave Noble, left, and Greg Thomas look out onto a neighboring field where a 2,700-acre solar
facility is proposed near Bonanza. Neighbors oppose the project because it will take irrigated
farmland out of production.
ring the growth, he said. “There’s more firms
constructing, so there’s more competition, and
competition drives costs down,” he said.
A megawatt of solar power capacity
requires about 5 to 10 acres and costs about
$780,000 to $910,000 to install at the utility
scale, depending on the technology.
The Bonanza project alone is projected to
increase Oregon’s solar capacity by 150-300
megawatts, depending on the configuration of
the final design.
Though installation has grown cheaper, sit-
ing remains a challenging aspect of the solar
development process. Projects require suit-
able land that’s close enough to transmission
lines and substations to make economic sense.
“You may start seeing clusters of solar
facilities in one area because of those attri-
butes,” Zwieg said.
Resistance from surrounding landowners
is a less tangible but very real impediment to
developing a solar facility.
Hecate Energy is still conducting its due
diligence on the Bonanza site, which was cho-
sen partly because a natural gas facility was
approved there by Oregon’s Energy Facility
Siting Council nearly 20 years ago.
The many objections to the project —
including the loss of irrigated land, wildlife
habitat and cultural heritage — will be worked
through as the company discusses the details
with stakeholders, Zwieg said.
“We want to be good neighbors. We want
to minimize our impacts,” he said. “You don’t
want to look at all the projects the same. Your
approach to opposition needs to evolve with
each project.”
‘Really big problem’
Even so, the controversies repeatedly
encountered by solar projects in Oregon have
taken a toll on the industry, experts say.
“Anecdotally, we’re hearing from develop-
ers that it’s a really big problem,” said Max
Greene, regulatory and policy director for the
Renewable Northwest nonprofit, which advo-
cates for solar, wind and geothermal projects.
Unless Oregon comes up with a way to
make the public more comfortable with solar
projects, it will be difficult or even impossi-
ble to build new facilities in the state, he said.
“I don’t think we’re there yet. We’re at this
flashpoint,” he said. “It’s a sign we need to do
something to get people together and figure
this out.”
Battles over large-scale facilities occur
before the Energy Facility Siting Council,
whose decisions can be appealed directly to
the state’s Supreme Court.
Smaller projects approved by county gov-
ernments are challenged before the state’s
Land Use Board of Appeals, whose decisions
are reviewed by the Oregon Court of Appeals.
Bills governing solar siting are also reg-
ularly debated in the Legislature, which
recently gave county governments increased
jurisdiction over such projects.
Farmland preservation groups prefer the
council’s siting process because they’re afraid
county governments aren’t equipped to thor-
oughly analyze solar facilities.
However, the council’s process also
has critics, such as Donnie Boyd, a Klam-
ath County commissioner opposed to the
Bonanza project.
“If the project is a certain size, they can
go around the county and do whatever they
want,” he said. “The EFSC process takes out
the local input. I don’t think the state govern-
ment should be able to dictate to local citizens
how they want their area.”
One of the more significant changes affect-
ing solar development has occurred on the
regulatory front: A 2019 rule from the state’s
Department of Land Conservation and Devel-
opment effectively prohibited solar facilities
on the two highest classes of soil.
The impact has particularly been felt in
western Oregon, where solar development
has largely ground to a halt since the rule was
enacted, said Angela Crowley-Koch, execu-
tive director of the Oregon Solar and Storage
Industries Association.
“Most people feel like the Willamette Val-
ley is off the table right now,” she said.
While the area is notoriously soggy and
cloudy, it still receives enough ultraviolet light
to allow for productive solar facilities, Crow-
ley-Koch said. Critically, the west side is also
where most of the state’s power demand is.
“The decision was really using an ax
when you should have used a scalpel,” she
said. “The DLCD ruling didn’t allow for any
nuance.”
Advocates of farmland preservation see the
rule change as a victory. The regulation came
after the Oregon Farm Bureau, 1,000 Friends
of Oregon and local nonprofits raised an alarm
about the proliferation of solar proposals on
farmland.
In the experience of the farmland preser-
vation nonprofit Friends of Yamhill County,
most farmers in the area have received solic-
itations from solar developers, said Kathryn
Jernstedt, the organization’s president. “We’re
constantly fighting the misconception that
agricultural land is vacant land. It’s not.”
Friends of Yamhill County isn’t opposed to
renewable energy but doesn’t consider solar
panels to be the best use of high-value farm-
land, since they don’t depend on high-quality
soil or provide the same “economic multipli-
ers” as agriculture, she said.
Though solar developments can provide
income for farmers, that doesn’t justify build-
ing them on valuable soils, she said. “Run-
ning a hotel on farmland would diversify their
income but it’s not an appropriate use of high-
value farmland.”
Landowners are paid from $300 to $2,000
per acre annually — depending on the proj-
ect’s size, location and other variables — for
solar facilities installed on their properties.
Contracts are usually for about 20 years and
cover the productive lifespan of the project.
FIVE
St r
da d s
ƒ
find dad a gift
he’ll love
TRIMMERS
BLOWERS
CHAIN SAWS
STARTING AT
STARTING AT
STARTING AT
139
$
139
$
99
99
*
189
$
99
ASK ABOUT STIHL
*
PRESSURE
WASHERS
*A majority of STIHL gasoline-powered units sold in the United States are built in the United States from domestic and foreign parts and components.
Astoria
Long Beach
Seaside
Clatsop Power Equipment
34912 Hwy 101 Bus
503-325-0792
clatsoppower.com
Dennis Company
201 Pacific Ave
360-642-3166
denniscompanyace-longbeach.com
Seaside
Hardware
39 South Holladay Drive
503-738-3053
seasideacehardware.com
stihldealers.com
All prices are SNW-SRP at participating dealers while supplies last. ©2021 STIHL SNW21-622-145924-2