Editorial: Even some CT Democrats are resisting reckless solar-energy policies
Add the names of Jason Bowsza, first selectman of East Windsor, and Rep. Jaime Foster, of Ellington, to the short list of Democrats who defy party dogma and stand up for their constituents. Mr. Bowsza and Rep. Foster have been trying, thus far without success, to put the brakes on a maddening run on land in their communities by solar-energy developers.
East Windsor alone has witnessed the establishment of solar farms on a shocking 1,500 acres. Last March and September, electrical fires sparked by malfunctioning equipment caused brush fires in the town. “My husband and I were sitting in our living room when we heard a loud explosion, saw a wave of green light, and then a fire almost immediately followed,” East Windsor resident Amanda Wright, who lives near the solar farm on East Road, told Hearst Connecticut Media.
Mr. Bowsza described his experience with legislators as “beyond frustrating.” Rep. Foster said, “Thirty percent of the state’s renewable portfolio is energy generated in East Windsor. People are saying that their ears are ringing from sunrise to sunset because of the inverters,” which produce a 30-decibel hum. Sen. John Kissel and Rep. Carol Hall, both Republicans, are on board with the Democratic solar skeptics as well.
The problem, for the municipal elected officials, is simple: They have no authority over where, and to what extent, solar farms are built in their communities. “The Connecticut Siting Council has exclusive jurisdiction over the construction, maintenance and operation of energy and telecommunications infrastructure throughout the state,” Melanie Bachman, executive director of the Siting Council, wrote to state lawmakers.
In anything resembling a sane approach to energy production, this would not be a problem because nobody would be building solar farms in a state as small as Connecticut. Land availability in a state with rugged topography is always at a premium, so land-use requirements should be a top priority guiding development. And under this standard, solar farms are just about the most wasteful option there is.
Consider: The Millstone nuclear power plant in Waterford produces 2,100 megawatts of electricity, consistently and reliably, on 500 acres; the natural-gas-fired plant in Oxford, one of more than 50 in the state, generates 805 megawatts on a 26-acre site. The East Windsor solar farms, which generate electricity only during the daytime hours and sometimes not even then, depending on the weather, max out at 170 megawatts. And they aren’t even “green.” Intermittent energy is dirty energy, since it compels conventional power stations to cycle up and down, producing more air pollution than they would if they functioned at optimum efficiency.
On top of that, solar panels that have reached the end of their useful lives contain such hazardous substances as lead, selenium and cadmium. It remains to be seen whether large numbers of panels will be, or even can be, disposed of safely.
The news isn’t all bad, notwithstanding Mr. Bowsza’s understandable frustration. According to a March 19 report by Hearst CT, several bills are being considered by lawmakers, “targeting improved safety at the solar farms and energy-storage sites,” as well as upgraded fire reporting. The Environment Committee has passed a bill that would require soil testing at solar farms to ensure they are not causing water pollution. Also under consideration is a proposed change to the Siting Council’s makeup.
If there is to be a silver lining in the solar-farm epidemic, it’s the willingness of some Democrats to resist the extremes of idiocy that blot the map of the party’s ideology. Let’s hope it’s catching.
This article originally published at Editorial: Even some CT Democrats are resisting reckless solar-energy policies.