• GMP doing it all wrong
    April 13,2014
    Albert J. Marro / Staff File Photo

    Students at Stafford Technical Center assist Green Mountain Power technicians with the installation of solar panels off Cleveland Avenue in Rutland in November 2012.

    Nobody should be surprised by the easily anticipated opposition to the numerous proposed solar projects that are part of Green Mountain Power’s “Solar Capital” initiative.

    I will not call it a “plan” because plan implies that there has been some planning involved. Only GMP knows what that plan is. The corporation is not communicating with planners about “the plan.”

    With one exception — the old landfill — all the sites that make up GMP’s 10-megawatt Rutland solar initiative are on fields, some of which involve stream buffers and flood plains, most of which contain wetlands and agricultural soils and are in close proximity to neighbors. Even the landfill site raises issues because of proximity to neighbors. The Old Poor Farm site involves cutting trees and eliminating hiking trails.

    Most of the developers have no connection to the Rutland region and stand to make large profits from their investments. GMP has even petitioned the Public Service Board to keep the power output and prices they (that means you, the ratepayer) are paying to these solar developers confidential, a request the PSB wisely denied.

    The Rutland Herald would do a service to the community by digging into the financial structures of these deals, which apparently lead to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in profits for those mostly out-of-state investors. Included in that analysis should be the sale of Renewable Energy Certificates out of state, which means that according to Federal Trade Commission guidelines, GMP cannot claim that these Rutland “Solar Capital” projects are renewable energy for Vermonters.

    Solar developers work with the Rutland Economic Deveopment Corp., not town or regional planners, to identify potential sites. They enter into power purchase agreements and develop their applications without any discussion with community members who learn about the projects when they are already far along in the development phase, including having what are essentially closed-door negotiations with state agencies of Natural Resources and Agriculture.

    Neighbors, marginalized by being labelled NIMBYs, who have legitimate concerns about aesthetics including glare, environmental issues, impacts on property values, and noise — yes, solar inverters hum and contain fans — find out about these solar projects when they receive letters during the required 45-day notice period, and then must scramble to understand the PSB process, dig into their own pockets to participate in what is truly an impossible process for anyone who is not a lawyer, with a virtual certainty based on recent precedent that the PSB will rubber stamp the application because the Legislature told them to approve standard offer (at above-market prices) solar projects as quickly as possible.

    Read the PSB’s approval of the precedent-setting Charlotte solar project to understand the Board’s reasoning.

    Several of these large Rutland solar proposals are in close proximity to stores with flat roofs and large parking lots that are more appropriate locations that would lead to broader public acceptance. Working with town and regional planners and providing opportunities for public input in the development of proposals on the built landscape rather than green fields will result in successful renewable energy for Vermonters. There is a right way to do solar, which many people who find themselves labelled “opponents” want to support, utilizing better sites developed through collaboration.

    The best way to assure that renewable energy in Vermont fails is for GMP to continue with its current model. Solar development is now so lucrative and legislative policies guiding the PSB are being interpreted so strictly that there is no impediment to covering every possible open field with solar panels.

    Will GMP continue to exploit our state’s resources while ignoring our communities and the people who live here and sending the benefits out of state? It does not have to be this way. Solar panels are a symbol of progress for some, but for others they are as ugly as billboards. Unlike wind turbines which cannot be hidden, there are many appropriate sites for solar panels that will enable Vermont to meets our renewable energy goals while also protecting Vermont’s aesthetic and community values.

    Proponents of solar, as I am, are right to be dismayed by GMP’s exploitive and disrespectful model, which is doomed to failure. It is ironic that a California organization recently gave GMP an award for its solar development, at the same time opposition is increasing in Vermont because GMP is doing it all wrong.

    Annette Smith is executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment. She lives in Danby.

    MORE IN Perspective
    The surge in popularity in food trucks has added a new challenge for health inspectors who must... Full Story
    “It is wrong and immoral to seek to escape the consequences of one’s acts,” said Mahatma Gandhi,... Full Story
    There’s been a lot of talk by the media about debates in this gubernatorial election. Full Story
    More Articles
    • VIDEOS
    • PHOTOS