1. Wells County, Indiana – One of the nation’s most at-risk solar projects may now be prompting a full on moratorium.
- Late last week, this county was teed up to potentially advance a new restrictive solar ordinance that would’ve cut off zoning access for large-scale facilities. That’s obviously bad for developers. But it would’ve still allowed solar facilities up to 50 acres and grandfathered in projects that had previously signed agreements with local officials.
- However, solar opponents swamped the county Area Planning Commission meeting to decide on the ordinance, turning it into an over four-hour display in which many requested in public comments to outright ban solar projects entirely without a grandfathering clause.
- It’s clear part of the opposition is inflamed over the EDF Paddlefish Solar project, which we ranked last year as one of the nation’s top imperiled renewables facilities in progress. The project has already resulted in a moratorium in another county, Huntington.
- Although the Paddlefish project is not unique in its risks, it is what we view as a bellwether for the future of solar development in farming communities, as the Fort Wayne-adjacent county is a picturesque display of many areas across the United States. Pro-renewables advocates have sought to tamp down opposition with tactics such as a direct text messaging campaign, which I previously scooped last week.
- Yet despite the counter-communications, momentum is heading in the other direction. At the meeting, officials ultimately decided to punt a decision to next month so they could edit their draft ordinance to assuage aggrieved residents.
- Also worth noting: anyone could see from Heatmap Pro data that this county would be an incredibly difficult fight for a solar developer. Despite a slim majority of local support for renewable energy, the county has a nearly 100% opposition risk rating, due in no small part to its large agricultural workforce and MAGA leanings.
2. Clark County, Ohio – Another Ohio county has significantly restricted renewable energy development, this time with big political implications.
- Clark County has now banned solar and wind projects in unincorporated areas, which will drastically cut off access to the area given that all 10 towns had also passed resolutions opposing large-scale solar in their jurisdictions.
- Until recently, this county has long been viewed as a bellwether in presidential elections. At least until the 2016 presidential race when Donald Trump won it handily – and it has stayed red ever since.
- The county has also resisted previous pushes for outright bans on renewable energy, choosing in 2022 to instead view projects on a case-by-case basis.
- Taken in sum, this trendline matches what Heatmap polling data has revealed: few indicators are more successful at predicting opposition to renewable energy than whether a county flipped from Obama to Trump in 2016.
3. Daviess County, Kentucky – NextEra’s having some problems getting past this county’s setbacks.
- Earlier this year, Daviess county enacted a mandatory 1,000-foot residential property setback for solar projects. NextEra is still trying to get permission to construct its Owensboro solar facility – which would not comply with that setback as proposed – in time to acquire federal tax credits under the deadline set for next year. NextEra is pushing to get the setback reduced to under 400 feet.
- Unfortunately for NextEra, county commissioners here are intently focused on the risk of fires at solar farms due to the high concentration of farm properties neighboring the proposed facility. Arguments about monitoring the site aren’t swaying officials.
- The next steps here will be: NextEra has to submit copious data requested by the county on its fire history and tax projections. This sounds like something companies should be developing and having at the ready whenever.
4. Columbia County, Georgia – Sometimes the wealthy will just say no to a solar farm.
- Bijan Solar lost a vote for rezoning at the county commission last week, as residents complained about general land use and property values. The commission also denied permits for other new projects, including a luxury boat storage site.
- This is a classic example of overcrowding in a suburban area that may hit a threshold for permission to build. Although Columbia County does not have much solar generation or a history of conflict over projects, it does achieve a high opposition risk ranking in Heatmap Pro’s database because of the number of high income people living there, as the majority of residents make more than $100,000 a year.
5. Ottawa County, Michigan – A proposed battery storage facility in the Mitten State looks like it is about to test the state’s new permitting primacy law.
- At issue is a Key Capture Energy facility in this county on the west coast of Michigan. If constructed, the battery storage would be apparently next to a dairy farm, which has prompted a familiar form of passionate farmer revolt, with angry locals filling up planning commission hearings.
- Key Capture Energy has said the four-hour battery storage will not be connected to any renewable energy projects and is just supposed to make the grid more resilient by helping shore up power during peak evening hours. Opponents of the project have claimed this is false and it will bring about new renewable energy facilities in the region, along with raising the usual fire concerns.
- There’s another option should local officials side with opponents – Michigan enacted a law last year that enables developers to go straight to state regulators for permission to build. (If you remember, we previously chronicled how this is turning into a legal dispute.)
- It’s still early in the process, so we will have to wait and see what locals are able to pull off here and whether the state intervention is necessary.
