The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Hotspots

Missouri Could Be First State to Ban Solar Construction

Plus more of the week’s biggest renewable energy fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Cole County, Missouri – The Show Me State may be on the precipice of enacting the first state-wide solar moratorium.

  • GOP legislation backed by Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe would institute a temporary ban on building any utility-scale solar projects in the state until at least the end of 2027, including those currently under construction. It threatens to derail development in a state ranked 12th in the nation for solar capacity growth.
  • The bill is quite broad, appearing to affect all solar projects – as in, going beyond the commercial and utility-scale facility bans we’ve previously covered at the local level. Any project that is under construction on the date of enactment would have to stop until the moratorium is lifted.
  • Under the legislation, the state would then issue rulemakings for specific environmental requirements on “construction, placement, and operation” of solar projects. If the environmental rules aren’t issued by the end of 2027, the ban will be extended indefinitely until such rules are in place.
  • Why might Missouri be the first state to ban solar? Heatmap Pro data indicates a proclivity towards the sort of culture war energy politics that define regions of the country like Missouri that flipped from blue to ruby red in the Trump era. Very few solar projects are being actively opposed in the state but more than 12 counties have some form of restrictive ordinance or ban on renewables or battery storage.

Clark County, Ohio – This county has now voted to oppose Invenergy’s Sloopy Solar facility, passing a resolution of disapproval that usually has at least some influence over state regulator decision-making.

  • Ordinarily, this project wouldn’t be able to move forward because of a county moratorium on solar development that is in place until fall 2027. However Invenergy was able to grandfather the project in because of an existing agreement with PJM Interconnection, sending the decision to the Ohio Power Siting Board which will have to parse through extremely staunch and well-documented opposition.
  • At issue here is whether the OPSB will see the overwhelming rejection at the local level as evidence of the project being contrary to public necessity. A vote is not yet scheduled on that decision.

Millard County, Utah – Here we have a case of folks upset about solar projects specifically tied to large data centers.

  • Millard County commissioners unanimously rezoned thousands of acres of state land for Creekstone Energy solar projects that would eventually power AI data centers. According to local media reports, negative public comments primarily focused on the fact public land would be dedicated to energy powering private companies, and a need to ensure the community receives adequate benefits for use of that land.
  • The county assuaged those concerns by coupling its approval with a requirement that Creekstone Energy draft a “development agreement” that lays out responsible use of the public lands. My hunch is that this was sufficient for Millard County officials because it is a massive county with very little private land, and they’re used to navigating multiple-use issues and solar development.

Orange County, California – Compass Energy’s large battery project in San Juan Capistrano has finally died after a yearslong bout with local opposition.

  • Compass had the chance to take a second bite at the apple after Orange County regulators rejected the proposal, thanks to the state’s permitting primacy law governing batteries. We’ve seen other examples of contested battery projects gliding smoothly thanks to that statute. But it appears Compass decided to take the route that didn’t require continued public relations frustrations and criticism from Democratic U.S. Representative Mike Levin, who represents the development area and is usually one of Congress’s most forceful proponents of renewable energy.
  • The company rescinded its permitting request to the California Energy Commission in late December. The letter was first reported this week by the local publication Voice of OC.
  • My conclusion from this saga is simple: Battery storage projects sited near schools or residential homes will consistently find themselves in hot water.

Hillsdale County, Michigan – Here’s a new one: Two county commissioners here are stepping back from any decision on a solar project because they have signed agreements with the developer.

  • The commission is deciding whether to approve a large Ranger Power solar facility that includes land deals with two members, Dale Baker and Steve McElroy. The solar project is being inundated with opposition from nearby landowners and farmers, and so it makes sense these two would recuse themselves from any final outcome that could appear biased.
  • By stepping away, however, they’re apparently depriving the county commission a quorum, meaning it cannot decide on the project. Making matters even trickier, another commissioner represents the host town for the project, which supports its development for tax revenue reasons. Quite the comedic outcome of a failure in local governance!
Yellow

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Secrecy Is Backfiring on Data Center Developers

The cloak-and-dagger approach is turning the business into a bogeyman.

A redacted data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

It’s time to call it like it is: Many data center developers seem to be moving too fast to build trust in the communities where they’re siting projects.

One of the chief complaints raised by data center opponents across the country is that companies aren’t transparent about their plans, which often becomes the original sin that makes winning debates over energy or water use near-impossible. In too many cases, towns and cities neighboring a proposed data center won’t know who will wind up using the project, either because a tech giant is behind it and keeping plans secret or a real estate firm refuses to disclose to them which company it’ll be sold to.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

Why Environmental Activists Are Shifting Focus to Data Centers

A conversation with Save Our Susquehanna’s Sandy Field.

Sandy Field.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Sandy Field, leader of the rural Pennsylvania conservation organization Save Our Susquehanna. Field is a climate activist and anti-fossil fuel advocate who has been honored by former vice president Al Gore. Until recently, her primary focus was opposing fracking and plastics manufacturing in her community, which abuts the Susquehanna River. Her focus has shifted lately, however, to the boom in data center development.

I reached out to Field because I’ve been quite interested in better understanding how data centers may be seen by climate-conscious conservation advocates. Our conversation led me to a crucial conclusion: Areas with historic energy development are rife with opposition to new tech infrastructure. It will require legwork for data centers – or renewable energy projects, for that matter – to ever win support in places still reeling from legacies of petroleum pollution.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

How the Tech Industry Is Responding to Data Center Backlash

It’s aware of the problem. That doesn’t make it easier to solve.

Data center construction and tech headquarters.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The data center backlash has metastasized into a full-blown PR crisis, one the tech sector is trying to get out in front of. But it is unclear whether companies are responding effectively enough to avoid a cascading series of local bans and restrictions nationwide.

Our numbers don’t lie: At least 25 data center projects were canceled last year, and nearly 100 projects faced at least some form of opposition, according to Heatmap Pro data. We’ve also recorded more than 60 towns, cities and counties that have enacted some form of moratorium or restrictive ordinance against data center development. We expect these numbers to rise throughout the year, and it won’t be long before the data on data center opposition is rivaling the figures on total wind or solar projects fought in the United States.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow