Bacon's Rebellion

Voting to Impose Big Solar on Other Legislator’s Voters

—

by

Steve Haner
in , , ,

by Steve Haner

Virginia’s legislators are expected to look at more bills in January to provide ways to override local objections to major renewable energy projects, especially the large solar fields that can cover hundreds of acres. A regional media outlet with a focus on rural Virginia just pointed out an inconvenient truth.

The legislators likely to vote to force these projects on the balking rural Virginians won’t be the legislators who represent the balking rural Virginians.

The insight comes from Dwayne Yancey at Cardinal News. Loyal readers know Yancey was a colleague of mine and Jim Bacon’s in Roanoke 40 years ago, and keeping up with his work at Cardinal News is exhausting. It is always interesting, and always data driven.

The data here comes from 1) the 2020 almost purely partisan roll call on passage of the Virginia Clean Economy Act and 2) a new database of pending and approved solar project proposals proffered by Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia. He produced a quick map of the localities where at least some of the legislators voted “aye.” Yancey cross references and writes:

Let’s take a closer look at this divide. This map shows the home cities/counties of the legislators who, in 2020, voted for the Clean Economy Act. Within those localities, the Virginia Solar Database shows just 29 of the state’s 343-plus solar projects. Only one of those, in Chesterfield County, is in the largest size classification of more than 150 megawatts.

So even most of the projects that are in those localities are smaller, too small to trigger the state oversight and state override authority being contemplated. Those legislators won’t face constituents angry over a large solar project across the street. Even fewer VCEA “ayes” have constituents who will look from their beach front property and see a sea of blinking red lights at night and of swirling turbine blades on clear days. 

The map includes two localities -– Scott County in Southwest Virginia and Clarke County in the DC suburbs -– because Republicans Terry Kilgore and Jill Vogel voted in favor. Kilgore voted for VCEA because the final version protected a coal plant in his region from quick closure. That was hardly the worst bit of hypocritical sausage making in the bill. Remove those two counties, and the map basically reflects the partisan divide in the Assembly, and the Democratic desert outside the urban centers.

Just another example (think private jets to clean energy confabs and fancy restaurants during lockdowns) where the rules apply to everybody but them.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

Comments

13 responses to “Voting to Impose Big Solar on Other Legislator’s Voters”

  1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    Apparently "eco social justice" means things that liberals do not like cannot be built, and the things liberals do like must be built.

  2. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    From what I have observed of the local land-use disputes over solar power in rural counties, the issues have been pragmatic and local, not broadly ideological. Foes of solar projects cite the visual impact, the environmental impact, the erosion of the "rural way of life." etc. Given the fact that there is a red/blue political and ideological divide between those demanding renewable energy and those supplying it, and that the voters in "red" counties tend to be conservative and climate-crisis skeptics, I'm surprised we haven't seen the battle over solar escalate into a battle over the merits of climate-change ideology generally.

    One mitigating factor, I expect, is that farming in Virginia is not a terribly lucrative occupation, and landowners are eager to find new sources of revenue… which solar farms can provide.

  3. William O'Keefe Avatar
    William O'Keefe

    This will turn federalism on its head even if it wasn't already in a sad state. Thomas Jefferson believed in the concept of subsidiarity and so do I.
    If the GA goes ahead this issue will probably end up in court.

  4. WayneS Avatar
    WayneS

    Do you have a map showing the locations where projects greater than 150 megawatts are proposed?

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Meanwhile in other parts of "liberal" Virginia, people oppose power lines and data centers… etc… NIMBY not just RoVa!

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    The solar farms proposed are from private landowners who have a right to develop their properties to generate income to pay their taxes.

    When someone can be approved to operate a pig farm or a poultry operation or a pipeline or cell tower or power line or put biosolids on their fields or operate a landfill, etc, etc… tell me how and why solar has bigger impacts when the biggest one in Virginia, you cannot SEE at all from pubic roads or even adjacent properties because of 15 ft berms and natural and planted vegetation.

  7. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Here is one of the biggest solar farms in the US, more than 5000 acres of it, much of it built on land that had been timbered in Spotsylvania, Va.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b14319b7d5601e33cdda259dcd3eb1184a8d8703e8bd1f96fcd577de9070ab88.png
    Try to go see it. It's close to impossible. It's almost completed shielded by natural and planted vegetation and berms AND , NOW, it's got an additional business, GOAT farming !

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cbd5f51ee15e3a0f8d4658e81d7e0078151ab9551e4412e61e172fd0166c4a2c.png

    It generates millions of dollars in taxes every year
    as opposed to thousands of more houses that use more in services than they pay for.

    Most conservatives USED to support business formation and private land ownership and development.

    Someone who owns 5000 acres of land in Virginia has to pay taxes on it yearly. That land needs to generate enough income to pay those taxes. Farming in Va does not generate enough income for someone to make a living at it much less even pay the taxes on it.

    Drive around rural Virginia and point out the real farms still in operation as farming businesses, and not "hobby" farms owned by the wealthy.

  8. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Dwight Yancey is cerainly one of the most prolific and insightful journalists around. Cardinal News fills a big media void. Also kudos to the Weldon Cooper Center for creating a solar farm database. I have often thought that such a resource would be really helpful.

    On this issue of solar farms, there are lots on inconsistencies in addition to the one pointed out by Yancey. For example:

    1. Some folks on this blog did not seem to have much sympathy with private landowners were protesting the ability of Dominion and other utilities to rip up their land and install a large pipeline through their property. State law provides eminent domain authority to utilities.
    2. Many Democrats, especially those from Northern Virginia, chafe at the idea that Virginia is a Dillon Rule state and localities don't enjoy home rule status. Yet, they are seriously considering enabling the state to override local decision on the siting of solar farms.
    3. Many conservatives in rural areas are strong proponents of private property rights. Yet, in many cases, they want to prevent some landowners in their areas from using their property for solar farms.

    It all comes down to whose ox is being gored.

  9. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Welcome to a backwards state governance system that implements a strong version of Dillon's Rule. Back when it became clear that Virginia was shifting ever leftward, I repeatedly called on the then Republican majority in the General Assembly to push for more home rule and less Dillon's Rule. Alas, and as usual, the Republicans in Virginia simply stared slack jawed and glassy eyed while the leftward shift occurred. Now they have exactly what was predicted – a Democratic majority in a state where localities have little power.

    Hey RPV … don't say I didn't warn you …

    https://www.baconsrebellion.com/dillons-rule-the-rpv-and-the-marylandization-of-virginia/

  10. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    Given the longstanding complaints from local officials in NoVA about the Dillon Rule, one would expect they would strongly oppose this legislation as it weakens local powers. And it also sets a precedent for overriding local authority on other land use issues. Such legislation is also likely to create conflict between NoVA's environmental groups and community organizations. I wouldn't call this a done deal.

  11. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Kicking and screaming, Virginia will be dragged into the twentieth century.

  12. Clarity77 Avatar
    Clarity77

    It might be prudent to look at how solar is working out in other states such as California who are further "down the road" to solar. You are free to draw your own conclusions, especially those of you on the left who comment and promote such with a leftist missionary zeal. But, oh wait, the most zealous in which the dogma is rich who also claim to value "democracy" are so confident in their position that they have chosen to block my posts. Apparent that I am consistently right over the target and their only choice is to run. Forthwith:

    https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/california-solar-power-oversupply-problem-19953942.php?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

    Leftists also value "intersectionality" then let us examine how the Green New Scam is going to "intersect" with the soon coming AI and its exponential energy requirements. Kaboom!!!

  13. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Hmmm…
    “As announced in 2015, the UAMPS project initially involved constructing 12 reactor modules capable of generating 600 MW, with the aim of starting operations “around 2023,” and at an “overnight cost” of $3 billion. In 2018, NuScale announced a design modification with each module now producing 60 MW of electricity, or 720 MW for the whole plant, claiming this would lower the cost “on a per kilowatt basis from an expected $5,000 to approximately $4,200.”

    The estimated costs of the project rose to $4.2 billion in 2018, then $6.1 billion in 2020, and finally $9.3 billion in 2023, after it was scaled down to 462 MW in 2021. In the end, the costs were clearly too high for UAMPS members to bear.”

    Hmmmm, hmmmm,
    “The Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project is estimated to cost $9.8 billion:
    Details
    Cost
    $9.8 billion
    Size
    2.6 gigawatts
    Turbines
    176 Siemens Gamesa 14 MW turbines
    Substations
    3 offshore substations
    Lease area
    113,000 acres”

Leave a Reply

ADVERTISEMENT