With the flick of a switch, I recently joined the growing ranks of homeowners who’ve installed rooftop solar panels. In my case, the timing was good since I planned to replace my roof. Overall, I’m pleased with the decision, and hopefully my electric bill will all but disappear, as anticipated. I also felt great about doing it and helping in a small way to fight climate change. Unfortunately, even with tax credits and rebates, my new panels will take approximately 25 years to get a return on investment (ROI) — just when it's likely needing replacement. This is much too long, and illustrates that solar installations remain pricey and out of reach for too many. If electric rates continue to rise, my ROI will come sooner. Was it a good investment? Time will tell. But that is the problem: We don’t have much time left.

In 2019, New York set into law very aggressive climate goals, including generating 100 percent zero-emission electricity and having a zero-emission electric grid by 2040, just 15 short years from now. If this goal is to be met, and the effects of climate change grow worse, we have to make solar installations far less costly and move much more quickly. In addition, we have to get more proactive in figuring out where to put solar installations in our communities, especially in light of growing opposition to larger projects.

An example of community pushback against solar array installations may be found right here in the Town of Ulster, where a proposed location controversially requires cutting down some trees and scrub. In a prior column, I expressed support for this project for several reasons. My support primarily comes down to the need for speed, and the complete failure of government to do even the basics of proper site planning and leading developers to those sites. Instead, we find ourselves in Ulster and in many locations throughout the Hudson Valley in needless battles.

The illogic of cutting down trees in the name of building solar power to offset carbon makes one’s head explode. However, in the age of rampant NIMBYism, misinformation, hostility to large business and utilities and slow-moving government, getting needed commercial-sized solar installations built is increasingly difficult, to say the least. Opponents of the Ulster plan suggest other locations such as houses, commercial rooftops and parking lots. These ideas, currently promoted by groups like Scenic Hudson, sounds reasonable. But it doesn’t tell the whole story.

When it comes to rooftop solar’s potential for electricity generation, one optimistic study by the University College of Cork Ireland says that if every rooftop in the world was covered in solar panels — an area the size of all of Great Britain! — it would have met all the electric needs of the world back in 2018. But not today. Electricity consumption has been rising fast since 2018, and is expected to double in decades to come. Another study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which expresses a majority view among studies, estimates that if all U.S. rooftops had solar, it could generate 39 percent of America’s electricity based on a 2014 consumption rate. By 2050, this figure would drop to just 13 percent of what we’ll need according to Princeton University research. If we’re to get to net zero emissions for generating electricity, how are we going to get there? By constructing utility-scale solar (and wind) farms to replace coal, oil and gas.

In contrast to home-rooftop panels, commercial utility-scale solar arrays cover much larger spaces and are much cheaper and efficient at producing electricity. This is because of economies of scale in purchasing, labor costs and maintenance. In comparison to a single applicant for a commercial solar array project, home and commercial installations involve thousands of installations and applicants, each one requiring its own site audit, financing, town approvals and permitting, coordination with Central Hudson and installation. And not every roof is a candidate for solar, such as historic sites, wooded locations and others. As I noted from my own experience, the current financial incentives for homeowner solar are still not enough to scale up and speed up installations enough to combat climate change. Until we streamline the application process and greatly lower solar costs for homes, commercial buildings and parking lots, we must proactively look for good location sites for needed utility-scale solar projects and connect solar companies and co-ops with the owners of these sites.

When considering locating a solar power installation, factors include having an abundance of light, free of shadows from trees, buildings, mountains, etc. It should also be in an area where the panels remain out of harm’s way. It has to be close to the electric grid to be connected, and accessible in order to be maintained. Since power transmission becomes less efficient over long distances, solar installations should be reasonably close to where it’s used. Aside from rooftops and parking lots, and brownfields, finding good locations for solar arrays quickly becomes a challenge.

One location that is often considered for solar arrays are farms. Farms are mostly clear of trees, have layouts making installation easy, and close to grid connections. But the idea of losing precious farmland to solar arrays doesn’t seem like a great idea to many, myself included. But that was before I heard about an innovative approach from an article in the local press. What caught my eye was legislation being worked on by state Sen. Michelle Hinchey on a novel concept called agrophotovoltaics — agrivoltaics for short.

Agrivoltaics involves harvesting solar energy and agricultural products from the same land area. Solar panels are elevated approximately five meters (16.5 feet) above the agricultural field using fixed or tracking support systems. This enables farm equipment and ample amounts of sunlight to reach the crops. It also enables cattle and sheep to graze under solar panels. And hosting pollinators like bees can also be included. Successful installations like this have already been built in the U.S., China and Europe.

The entire farmland is not covered with solar panels. Alternating rows of crops and solar panels are strategically arranged for the best output in energy production and growing. Solar panels do block light underneath, which can mean some trade-offs between optimizing crop yield, crop quality, and energy production. However, some crops and livestock benefit from the increased shade, lessening or even eliminating the trade-off. Research shows that on hot days, conditions beneath the panels are cooler than traditional growing methods. This brings significant benefits; less heat stress and evaporation from the soil reduces water demand. At night, heat gets retained even better than under the plastic coverings farmers currently use to protect plants from the cold. Maybe we can reduce plastic use on farms.

Agrivoltaics is also a unique economic opportunity for farms to generate additional income streams. It would also help in transitioning from old diesel-burning tractors and equipment to cleaner electric alternatives. Agrivoltaics would seem like a great fit for Ulster, with our large farming community and local government’s stated interest in supporting a local green economy. But as exciting as this idea is, it will take time to develop. I wish Senator Hinchey success in moving this legislation forward.

In the meantime, if we are to reach zero-emissions locally, and do so quickly, the process for getting solar arrays installed needs to be dramatically improved, and faster. Changes are needed, like streamlining permitting, increasing financial incentives and pre-planning suitable public and private sites for solar development. With the possibilities of newer options, like agrivoltaics, our area can also create many new jobs and businesses. I know we can do this.

Raleigh Green is a local business owner specializing in marketing communications consulting and services. If you enjoy this column, please ‘like’ it on social media and share online. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer; they do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Kingston Wire Editorial Team.