At nearly every turn, the pace of the solar rollout has been greatly underestimated.
While forecasts have stuck to sober projections of linear growth, the reality has been an exponential curve as costs have plummeted.
Last year, solar panels provided 6 percent of the world’s electricity and BloombergNEF expects another 585 gigawatts of new solar capacity to be installed throughout this year.
It looks like there is little that could dull solar’s shine — although the full effect of ramped-up US tariffs on Chinese panels remain to be seen.
Yet, unless we are able to figure out an affordable way to put panels in outer space, at some point there will be a limiting factor: Earthly space.
Arguments over land use are already bubbling up in Europe and slowing the deployment of utility-scale photovoltaic projects.
There is a particular tension between agricultural land and solar farms.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that solar panels were a “threat to food sovereignty” and the Italian government has issued an emergency decree banning farmers from leasing their land to solar developers.
Those hoping to diversify their revenue streams must invest directly in the infrastructure themselves, which must now be at least 2.1m tall to allow food to continue growing underneath.
In the UK, British Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Claire Coutinho said that solar power should not compromise food security and has urged local councils to reject projects on high-quality agricultural land.
Similar frictions are cropping up in Spain, Romania and the Netherlands.
However, the fears greatly outweigh the genuine risks to food production — and attempts to control where the solar rollout happens might end up being net negative for farmers.
For context, it is worth exploring just how much land solar would take up should the British government reach its power-output target of 70 gigawatts by 2035. A 2022 analysis by climate and energy publisher Carbon Brief found that ground-mounted solar panels covered less than 0.1 percent of land in the UK, requiring an average of 2.4 hectares per megawatt of capacity. Future solar farms can use space much more efficiently, with an average of just 1.2 hectares per megawatt, so adding an additional 38 gigawatts of ground-mounted solar power — assuming the current capacity is increased by up to five times — would require another 464km2, totaling 0.3 percent of the UK’s land area.
Even in the unlikely event that all ground-mounted solar panels were situated on farmland, they would cover approximately 0.41 percent of the country’s utilized agricultural area. Given that climate change has been identified as the biggest medium to long-term risk for UK food security, quibbling over such a small proportion of farmland does not seem worth it.
Besides, it also assumes that agriculture and photovoltaics cannot exist side-by-side, when the evidence suggests that they can complement each other nicely.
A study published last year showed that agrivoltaics — in which land is used to produce food and generate energy at the same time — can often enhance crop and forage yields: In a semi-arid environment, yields of tomatoes grown alongside panels were nearly threefold higher than in a traditional system.
Likewise, animal production in grazing lands can also be enhanced by reducing heat stress.
In the Netherlands, a raspberry farmer has installed one of Europe’s largest agrivoltaic arrays after a pilot project in 2020 proved successful. Berries are typically grown under plastic sheeting to protect them from severe weather conditions, but grower Maarten van Hoof found that growing under solar panels worked much better — withstanding wind, rain and reducing plastic waste.
Those concerned about food security might also forget that solar power can provide a lifeline to cash-strapped farmers who are struggling to make ends meet as they battle with extreme weather and rising costs.
In May, Helen Browning, chief executive officer of Soil Association — a Bristol, England-based charity — said during a media briefing by Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a London-based think tank, said that farmers were considering walking away as they could make much more money doing something else.
A record run of wet weather has left many in perilous financial situations and an annual National Farmers’ Union survey put farmers’ confidence at the lowest since it began in 2010.
Leasing land to solar developers gives farmers regular revenue for not much work, which could mean the difference between a farmer having to quit and being able to continue producing food.
Speaking to the Financial Times, one Italian farmer described solar panels as “a gift from the heavens.”
About 25 percent of designated farmland in Italy is lying fallow thanks to extreme heat, drought and rising costs. When growing food is simply unviable, why block growers from finding new ways to make a sustainable income off it, as Meloni’s new bill does?
Some are also concerned about the effect of large solar farms on biodiversity, but again, these developments can be net positive for biodiversity. Research has shown that vulnerable species are happily coexisting with solar parks, and pollinating insects are thriving as grasses and wildflowers sprout up beneath and between panels.
As a UBS Group AG report points out, those concerned about biodiversity ought to be more worried about the mining and production of materials used within solar panels, which accounts for more than 80 percent of the natural capital impacts of a solar power facility’s lifecycle.
There is a brewing issue in the uneven distribution of solar parks, with 43 percent of ground-mounted installations being in the southwest and southeast of England, which is leading to fierce local opposition.
Placing solar panels on brownfield sites, car parks and roofs should also be made much easier.
However, pitching solar power against food and biodiversity might do more harm than good to the agricultural sector and ignores a whole host of benefits to the planet and people.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
In competitive sports, the narrative surrounding transgender athletes is often clouded by misconceptions and prejudices. Critics sometimes accuse transgender athletes of “gaming the system” to gain an unfair advantage, perpetuating the stereotype that their participation undermines the integrity of competition. However, this perspective not only ignores the rigorous efforts transgender athletes invest to meet eligibility standards, but also devalues their personal and athletic achievements. Understanding the gap between these stereotypes and the reality of individual efforts requires a deeper examination of societal bias and the challenges transgender athletes face. One of the most pervasive arguments against the inclusion of transgender athletes
When viewing Taiwan’s political chaos, I often think of several lines from Incantation, a poem by the winner of the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz: “Beautiful and very young are Philo-Sophia, and poetry, her ally in the service of the good... Their friendship will be glorious, their time has no limit, their enemies have delivered themselves to destruction.” Milosz wrote Incantation when he was a professor of Slavic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He firmly believed that Poland would rise again under a restored democracy and liberal order. As one of several self-exiled or expelled poets from
EDITORIAL CARTOON
RSS