Siting solar facilities on Washington farmland is causing resentment in rural counties. The conflict is growing worse
Peace and prosperity: Washington is finding out it’s not always so easy to meld agricultural and energy goals. Photo: Farm and Energy Initiative
By Eva Jacroux. September 14, 2023. It’s hard to ignore the impact of climate change on agriculture in the Columbia River Basin.
Wildfires scar rangeland and farmers struggle to irrigate crops as rising temperatures and extreme weather pose new obstacles for the industry, especially in Washington counties east of the Cascade Range.
Among farmers, however, the most talked about threat to their livelihoods isn’t the impact of climate change.
Instead, it’s the impact of expanding renewable energy infrastructure across Washington’s farmland.
Washington has set aggressive targets to decarbonize the state’s energy profile. These targets will require state utilities to produce and purchase all energy from renewable or net zero sources by 2045.
In line with these goals, rural counties like Klickitat and Yakima counties boast strong renewable energy goals of their own.
With abundant land resources, these less-populated counties have capitalized on the push for renewables by rapidly expanding wind and particularly solar infrastructure.
Ground view: In Klickitat County, Greg Wagner founded C.E.A.S.E. to oppose government policies around solar installation siting. Photo: C.E.A.S.E.
Many private solar companies seek out farmland for utility-scale solar projects, brokering solar-lease covenants with private land owners that will last for decades.
Farmland is already clear and well maintained, close to transmission infrastructure and ideal for draining water, conditions that make it perfect for large-scale solar farms.
However, Mark Herke, president of the Yakima County arm of the Washington Farm Bureau, has for years spoken out against large-scale renewable energy infrastructure.
In fact, the Yakima County Farm Bureau refuses to even call the infrastructure “solar farms.”
“We dropped that term a long time ago,” Herke told Capital Press. “We call them solar-industrial complexes.”
Herke says he isn’t anti-solar energy. But at a February solar moratorium hearing in Klickitat County he laid out the mounting conflict between farmers and the push to convert agricultural land to renewable energy facilities.
“We need food, too, and we need farmland,” he said. “I’m all for the wind, but the solar thing is a completely different breed of cats, and it needs a completely different set of regulations.”
Across rural parts of the state, county commissions that were once all-in on solar are enacting solar moratoriums in response to strong public opposition to the siting of these facilities from farmers and rural residents.
In response to these moratoriums, solar companies looking to develop large tracts of land in places like Yakima and Klickitat counties have bypassed local governments and instead approached Washington state’s Energy Facility Siting Evaluation Council (EFSEC) to get higher approval to move forward with their projects.
The tactic may be strategic, and legal, but it’s also alienated many residents of rural counties who already feel their ability to govern their own property is compromised by larger political powers in more populous parts of the state.
Some wonder if a just transition from farmland to decarbonized energy sources in rural Washington is possible.
Renewables impact on salmon
Within the Columbia River Basin’s food-production system, the impacts of renewable energy projects expand beyond agriculture.
The timeline for water availability will change in the Columbia River Basin over the coming decades, putting pressure on the water supply to simultaneously: maintain adequate water levels to support fish populations, provide hydropower and meet agricultural needs.
Last year, the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fishing Commission (CRITFC) released an Energy Vision for the Columbia River Basin detailing strategies to support affordable and decarbonized energy production while protecting local fish populations and cultural resources.
Tribal voice: CRITFC’s Energy Vision covers salmon, people and energy. Image: CRITFC
“Without proper integration and siting,” the plan reads, “renewable resources can make things worse for Columbia River salmon and other tribal resources.”
The CRITFC energy vision lists multiple places that would be ideal for the construction of utility-scale solar infrastructure, including retired agricultural properties.
The organization acknowledges that while farmland can be ideal for solar installations, planning should incorporate strategic siting and integration of emerging technologies such as dual-use solar to avoid taking prime farmland out of commission.
Lack of strategic siting of renewable energy facilities poses a threat to tribal cultural resources as well.
At the February Klickitat County solar moratorium hearing, Elaine Harvey, a Yakama Nation fisheries biologist, outlined the impacts of solar projects on tribal access to First Foods.
“I come here today to talk about first and foremost, our cultural resources, and how we’re connected to this land, and how I’ve already seen and witnessed the Lund Hill solar project impact our resources in Roosevelt.”
The state’s largest solar-energy producer, the Lund Hill solar project occupies about three square miles in Klickitat County. The facility is owned by multinational energy giant Iberdrola, headquartered in Spain.
Roosevelt is an unincorporated community in Klickitat County.
What now?
Plenty of work remains to be done to settle land-use conflicts within the transition to a decarbonized future.
Yakima and Klickitat counties have each extended their moratoriums and will continue to hold public hearings in hopes of developing better regulations at the county level.
Washington State is exploring new legislation to integrate least-conflict siting that will better reflect the concerns of rural and tribal communities in development planning.
Farmland advocates like the Pacific Northwest branch of American Farmland Trust continue to release new research and on how to accommodate “smart solar” practices for rural land-use, as well as resources to help farmers better negotiate solar lease contracts.
As climate change exacerbates drought and extreme weather, the food systems that rely on the Columbia River are under threat.
But existing farmland will also be key for the mandated expansion of renewable energy infrastructure.
Washington’s moves toward its zero carbon emissions goals have stirred up resentment in the places most critical to reaching those goals.
How successful the state is in achieving its goals will depend on how well it balances competing interests. And makes genuine moves to align its own actions with the interests of locals who feel increasingly alienated by what they already see as draconian and out-of-touch decrees from Olympia.
