Agricultural solar controversies

Agricultural solar controversy

September 12, 2022

So this is the issue that has reoccurred: the solar panel controversy from rural Ohio.

The eternal recurrence of the…

Basically the controversy is the recalcitrance of rural America to adopting solar colocation on the farmland. Frankly solar colocation is not a good idea-the best argument for it is that it only marginally reduces crop yields. But the reason rural landowners are being propositioned with the business of rural solar is the confluence of two factors: the first is the commonsense reality that we should first figure out how to architect a good solar farm, and that has to happen with some good open space; the second, however, is that rooftop solar, which is the urban version, is almost too easy to do; labor prices fall and unions cannot maintain leverage for the good wages and benefits that we need. 

Of course, why not put it on rural buildings? - there aren't many. But of course, of course the efficiency of solar PV panels commercially available, are about half that of the experimental panel efficiency of about six years ago.

None of this explains the controversy, which is aesthetic, and the victimhood of being sold the lie that solar is a fad and a trend that will put you over the top. Again, this is a conflation, charlatanry in science communication with an argument based on aesthetics. When someone puts it that way, you can see that this "problem" is motivated by bad faith, but the farmers are not to blame.

The meta-conversation of that sell must go like: Farmer: "I have doubts about the long-term viability of this technology". Salesman: "Absolutely. And we've got lots of options…"

Well, here's the exact thing, about that, which is that, we actually don't… You can have your working PV, some sketchy solar thermal, or some organic variety that's just a stack-of-junk toy.

It's not reasonable to blame the farmers et al. of a rural community being sold solar for rejecting that sales pitch. And there is massive incalcitrance on someone's part, but it's incalcitrance that you shouldn't expect a farmer to sacrifice the product of his land for. Sales and such: you buy the idea, after all. If we don't like that, and here it's not working… why are you even doing it as a matter of sales?

The supporters of rural solar are going to try to convince their fellows by copying the stomach of the salesman who brought it to them; again, and abegnation of the responsibility of the salesman for not accurately portraying what it is they are selling. "What is the idea?" No idea.

We live in a nation of ideas. It's a fault to treat of the backbone of our nation, without ideas.