The Marshall Solar Energy Project and the NIMBY Effect

The Minnesota State Legislature requires 1.5% of power provided by major utilities to be solar energy by 2020. So far 25 sites around the state have been proposed for ground-mounted solar panels (source). One proposed project is the Marshall Solar Energy Project. It would cover 500 acres of what is currently farmland near Marshall, Minnesota. Once in use, it would generate electricity for 15,000 homes; while this is a tiny fraction of the power generated by a single coal plant, this is enough to provide power for all the homes in Marshall and the surrounding towns (source). NextEra, the company that is working on this project, initially tried to build a solar farm near Sioux Falls, but was stymied by local opposition. It seems that the same thing may happen in Marshall, due to concerns that are misinformed, biased and largely unfounded.

Chuck Muller, who lives near the proposed site, has spearheaded the local opposition. His main concern, though, is not related to any technical aspects of solar energy: he is concerned about the view. In an interview with MPR, he said that solar panels don’t mesh with “a quiet country setting” and that what has always been a rural area is now becoming too industrial. He and other neighbors are concerned about the decreased property values from an “unsightly” ground solar farm.

NextEra has been receptive to concerns, suggesting large buffer zones between private property and the solar farm and berms to block the view. Steve Stengel, a spokesperson for NextEra, has also stated that there is no evidence of solar energy projects reducing property values (source). This may not be enough, though.

An online petition started in February against the project has gained over 500 signatures. The petition is titled “Save Our Farms” and it frames the issue in terms of the 500 acres (or less than one square mile) that would no longer be dedicated to farmland if this proposal was passed. The text from the overview of the petition illustrates the concerns:

Approximately 500 acres of some of the best farmland in the state will be replaced with solar panels […]. Ten family farms will live within one mile of the land, where rich and abundant crops grown for decades will be replaced by an inefficient and out of place energy source. We are concerned of the possible health risks being forced upon these families, the value of their properties depleting, the disruption of natural habitat and the loss of county control. You may think this is Minnesota’s way of going green, but it is actually taking away the most important green our state currently grows - Save our farms!

Many of these concerns are unfounded. There is no evidence of health risks or an effect on property values from an isolated solar farm like this. (There is some evidence of health risks for those living in close contact with a PV system, but that is not applicable to this situation.) Solar energy may be less efficient than other energy sources, but the technology needs to be invested in if it is going to be improved. As far as “disruption of natural habitat” goes, the mass agriculture in South West Minnesota has already done that. Farm runoff has left no swimmable or fishable lakes in this region (source). To address “out of place” — people might just have to accept that their aesthetic dislike of solar panels isn’t more important than making the transition to renewable energy.

Farmers are the most influential voice in this region, and their concerns seem to be outweighing the rest of the population. This petition panders to the interests of the farmers and to people’s fear of the unknown. Most interestingly, virtually all of the opposition including Muller state that they are actually in favor of renewable energy — just not here. (Read some of the comments on the petition site if you want to see these sentiments.) This is a textbook manifestation of the “Not In My Backyard” (abbreviated NIMBY) effect. People support all sorts of things in theory (power plants, homeless shelters, airports, public transit) as long as they are out of sight (or smell or earshot). The NIMBY effect can lead to environmental racism, where things that are unpleasant to live near are placed by people who have the least power to oppose.

The NIMBY effect, in my opinion, is unfounded in response to the Marshall Solar Energy  Project. There are really no drawbacks to living within one mile of a solar farm, and NextEra is willing to work with neighbors to make it even more pleasant. Comparatively to the rest of this region, it is a very small loss in agricultural land. Energy companies are required to begin implementing solar energy and they have to start somewhere. If people are as supportive of renewable energy as they claim, they should not create such a fuss when these technologies are actually being put into use.