Editor’s note: This commentary is by Elizabeth Courtney, who is the co-author of “Greening Vermont: The Search for a Sustainable State,” and a Class of 1995 Loeb Fellow from Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design. She may be contacted at elizabethcourtneyvt@gmail.com
[W]hen the interstate hit Vermont, around 1958 — triggering a tsunami of unbridled land speculation and development — the citizens of the Green Mountain State scrambled to protect the natural resources and scenic beauty of their landscapes. They wrote policy and regulation to guide developers to appropriate building sites.
If interstate commerce stimulated the creation of the land use policies of the late 20th century, then responding to climate change is arguably the motivation for a new look at these policies. As we wean ourselves off the carbon-producing fossil fuels that have set climate change in motion, we move toward a renewable energy portfolio that will give us needed freedom from dirty fossil fuels. It will, however, also give us a new set of land use challenges.
With a more distributed, localized energy grid, there will be more “power plants,” closer to the users of that power. From residential rooftops to nearby parking lots, on top of big boxes, in farm fields and on mountaintops, we are seeing solar and other renewable installations popping up at a rapid rate. In an effort to help guide renewable energy developers during this transition, the Legislature and Gov. Peter Shumlin created the Energy Generation Siting Policy Commission (EGSPC), who wrote in their 2014 final report:
The change toward greater use of in-state renewable electric generation over the past decade, the expansion of merchant rather than utility-based generation, combined with an anticipated continuation of this growth as we move towards greater demand for electricity in the future, requires a fresh look at whether the processes we currently employ for review and approval of electric generation projects should be modified and improved.
To pursue that “fresh look,” the Legislature created earlier this year a Solar Siting Task Force to develop draft legislation that would address “siting, design and regulatory review of solar electric generation facilities.” In this instance the public policy is stated in the Comprehensive Energy Plan, to achieve 90 percent of our electric power from renewable generation by 2050. The question now is: How will the 90 by 2050 goal be achieved in a way that balances this essential transition with our need to protect our natural and cultural resources?
The essential and inevitable transition off of power plants in faraway places is here.
The chairman of the Solar Siting Task Force, Chris Recchia, is the commissioner of the Department of Public Service, the department representing ratepayers and the Shumlin administration. He says the solar boom is good for the state because it means a cleaner energy supply, a stronger electric grid, and more jobs for Vermonters.
But, he adds, “One of the key things that’s missing from here is any type of planning.” This is the endeavor the task force is charged with undertaking. How can the state better plan – and best balance – a variety of goals in a way that works for Vermonters, our lovely landscape, grid realities and people’s pocketbooks. Not an easy task. But, a really important one.
The task force will be holding hearings from now through the fall. The hope is that, at a minimum, they will reach at least four key milestones, suggested by the EGSPC and others:
• First, establish a realistic estimate of how many acres offer enough solar energy generation, keeping in mind the important role conservation and efficiency play in reducing that number.
• Second, establish how much solar could be located in places that would avoid impacting Vermont’s natural and cultural resources? How much more might Vermonters be willing to pay to prioritize places like rooftops, parking lots, gravel pits, landfills first, since they often come with a much bigger price tag or what other incentives might the state offer developers, in addition to or in place of financial incentives, to inspire them to build there first?
• Third, test the assumptions about feasibility of questionable siting options, such as wetlands, farmlands, large flat roofs or parking lots and truly understand the impacts, using science not scare tactics to make sound decisions.
• Finally, develop reasonable standards for decommissioning plans for facilities, understanding that technology and circumstances change over time as well as that such requirements come at a cost.
The reality is that we need a different approach than the one we are taking now. The essential and inevitable transition off of power plants in faraway places is here. Society will be powered by resources closer to where people live, work and play. How Vermont crafts policy and regulatory work that fosters a wise transition so that we protect the natural and cultural resources that define the Green Mountain State won’t be easy, but it is essential. It will require all stakeholders to come to the table with a can-do attitude and ideas for solutions. That means that participation in this process is critical to its success.
Please get involved as we enter this significant period of transition. Information on the hearings and the process of the Task Force are available at: http://solartaskforce.vermont.gov/
