Editor’s note: This commentary is by Gregg Beldock, who is chairman of the board of Bullrock Deutsch Eco, a solar development firm that has 100 megawatts of solar in the development process in New England. He is also President of Bullrock Corp., a real estate development company headquarted in Shelburne.
[I] remember the discussions that made me proud to be a resident of Vermont, a state that lead all others to consider and embrace social responsibility, championing causes such as nuclear nonproliferation, equal rights, gay marriage and sustainability. Unfortunately, the short sighted, literally, pending legislation relative to solar implementation across Vermont will have, if not legislated responsibly, devastating effects upon Vermont’s economy, Vermont’s image and renewable energy on a national level. The rest of the country is watching.
We can encourage renewable development, job growth, savings to taxpayers and ratepayers while minimizing the aesthetic implications of solar with proper siting regulations on a statewide level. A bill that included the following would do all that and more:
• Provide that projects adjoining, abutting or on municipal properties and buildings, schools and 501(c) entities as both sites and off-takers of the electricity generated will be incentivized by providing a bonus in the size of such permitted arrays. Currently net metering projects are limited to 500 kilowatts a/c; that utilizes approximately 3.5 acres of land or a rooftop of 82,000 square feet. A 50 percent bonus density for siting solar projects on these types of properties will encourage large net metering projects in direct proximity to their off-takers with minimal effect to the character of the area. Since off-takers are generally offered discounted utility rates this proposal provides savings where oftentimes most needed. What school couldn’t benefit from a 10 percent break in their electric bill?
• Legislate that net metering projects located on agricultural land, working farms, should be allowed and incentivized through a bonus density allowing a larger array up to 150 percent. Our farmers need help and more often than not they are willing to lease their least valuable land to solar development. Additionally, tilling and grazing of these lands often causes the greatest degradation to wetlands and water sources; solar arrays are far less damaging than continual land disturbance.
While municipal review will only add additional delay to an already burdensome and painful approval process simply mandating that local setbacks apply will solve most of the current complaints and issues surrounding siting.
• Insure that net metering projects which result in removing phosphorus from the Lake Champlain basin should be allowed and incentivized through a bonus density development allowing a larger array up to 150 percent.
• Projects that keep the investment tax credits within Vermont should be allowed a 20 percent bonus density and the credits should be allowed a carry forward to be applied to estate taxes; solar is creating jobs and it should also be utilized to keep tax dollars in Vermont. By some estimates the solar industry has created 16,231 jobs (according to Vermont.gov/cleanenergyjobsreport) in Vermont over the last three years and the current legislative standstill combined with the traffic jam at the Public Service Board is allowing those jobs to migrate out of state as I write. Similarly, Montpelier is urgently searching for a formula that will encourage estate tax dollars not to migrate to states with lesser estate tax burdens.
• All projects should be required to have 60 percent screening as depicted on a “moving” digital representation. Currently solar developers have sited projects oftentimes in obtrusive locations, too close to neighbors and roads with grossly insufficient screening. Simple digital representations and landscape installations where needed will avoid continued degradation of viewscapes.
• All projects should be minimum setback from property lines and roadways as depicted in the municipal plan for the applicable town. While municipal review will only add additional delay to an already burdensome and painful approval process simply mandating that local setbacks apply will solve most of the current complaints and issues surrounding siting.
• Net metering prices should be the residential rate within the applicable utility territory. The net metering rates provided years ago were reflective of a much more expensive development price and process for solar than today’s rates. Solar now makes economic sense for all parties on both sides of the solar tables. The greatest cost is the permitting delay and resultant indecision that results from that delay.
Let’s return Vermont to the forefront of responsible leadership on a global level.
