Questions for Sunfish Solar developer BayWa

If you received the postcard above – and it seems everyone in Orange County did, you may be considering attending one of the meetings advertised on the card. It is important for county residents to be aware of this project and to ask questions. We do not need another utility scale solar project dragging on in Orange County. (Did you know that the "Madison Solar" project on Route 20, approved in 2017, is on its third owner and is STILL under construction?)

For anyone unfamiliar with the proposed Sunfish Solar project, we’ve outlined a number of questions you might want to ask the German project developer BayWa. If you want to dive deep, we have links to BayWa’s application materials and 6 reasons the county should say no to this project HERE.

The first four questions address items that were left unresolved after the April 2 Planning Commission work session with the developer. The developer was tasked with following up on a traffic plan and viewshed study.

Panels – Are fixed or tilt panels being used for the project and where are the panels made?

BayWa does not want to commit to the type of panel until later in the siting plan process. However, the type of panel chosen affects glare to homes and motorists, stormwater management, and the height of the landscaping needed to buffer the project. In response to a question about where the panels are made, the developer shared a vague reply about the decision being dependent on US manufacturing capability. The developer added that they are interested in domestic/local manufacturing and workforce to the extent that they can and hopeful they’ll be able to utilize. “Interested in” and “hopeful” are not the answers the county needs.

Will electricity customers potentially see a decrease in their bills if the site is approved?

The developer told the commissioners that the electricity produced will go into the grid and a tangible benefit to end users is unlikely.

Construction traffic – How will public safety on Route 522 be protected during the construction phase?

The planning commissioners asked for more information on the traffic plan. The developer had not talked to VDOT about the entry to True Blue from 522 and was completely unaware of the challenges associated with 522 in that area, which has been the scene of fatalities.

Will neighbors be able to see the project?

The commissioners expressed the need for additional viewshed studies. Initial studies offered by the developer were minimal as well as misleading because the renderings showed vegetation, not at the time of installation, but after a couple years of growth. The renderings also did not adequately model views of the project from 522.

Other questions that might be asked:

How will the agricultural land and topsoil be protected during construction?

How will the site be maintained after construction? Who takes care of maintenance needs and landscaping?

Does BayWa have experience with decommissioning?

Do the project components get recycled when the project is decommissioned? Where will recycling and waste disposal be done?

What is the process for returning the land to agricultural use?

Is there a bond for road repairs that may be needed due to heavy construction traffic?

How does this project benefit the county and county residents?

Looking into our crystal ball, we predict that at each district meeting, the developer will offer a visually pleasing presentation (sheep grazing, wildflowers, and panels under a blue sky), and may appear to know what they are talking about. But if you ask substantive questions and expect detailed answers, they will struggle to provide clear answers and likely will pass you along to another BayWa representative. This happened repeatedly at BayWa’s first open meeting for Orange County residents.

If you’re on the fence about utility scale solar in Orange County, please consider the following:

1)      A project must be in substantial accord with the county's Comprehensive Plan. A reading of the Comp Plan identifies areas in which this project is not in substantial accord. For starters, the plan's vision is “Sustain the rural character of Orange County while enhancing and improving the quality of life for all its citizens.” A power plant with switchyard and substation does not sustain the rural character along True Blue Road. As for "quality of life for all its citizens," no one will benefit from this project except the two landowners who have chosen to lease their land to the developer.

2)      Could YOU tolerate a 12-18 month construction period that would significantly elevate traffic, dust and noise in your neighborhood for an estimated 10 hours a day? How about pile driving of 38,000+ steel posts? Could YOU live with a 100 foot buffer between your property and hundreds of acres of solar panels? Could YOU accept a decrease in your property’s value due to the proximity of a solar power plant surrounded by barbed wire topped chain link fencing?

If you reach the same conclusion that we’ve reached – that this project is a bad deal for Orange County – please let your district representatives know. Emails & phone numbers for the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors

The project will have one or two more reviews by the commissioners before proceeding to the Board of Supervisors. Please speak out against Sunfish Solar.

Thank you for visiting Protect Orange VA.

Solar developer BayWa presents the Sunfish Solar project

On April 4, 2024, the BayWa team presented the Sunfish Solar project to the Orange County Planning Commission. The video of the entire meeting, including the BayWa presentation and the commissioners’ comments and questions, can be viewed here. (The sections of the meeting are identified so that viewers can move right to the presentation and bypass earlier parts of the meeting.)

First up was Planning Staff project lead Eric Bittner, who did a short presentation that included reviewing the project acreage numbers: 424 acres fenced, 575 acres disturbed, 932 acres total project. He also mentioned the Orange County Comprehensive Plan’s “broad call for preserving rural area.”

Mr. Bittner identified primary impacts of the proposed project and potential mitigation options:

·       Impact: visibility & viewshed/Mitigation: setbacks, buffering

·       Impact: headwater impacts to Mountain Run and Rocky Branch/Mitigation: buffering & limiting crossings

·       Impact: Loss of farmland

Mr. Bittner noted that the project acreage is within the proposed Rapidan River-Clark’s Mountain Historic District. (Note: This district has been determined eligible for listing on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic Places. A full nomination effort is underway; more info here.)

The BayWa team then started their presentation, which was basically a much condensed overview of the project application.

During the presentation the team responded to concerns they say they have heard related to decommissioning. They said that the project area would be fully decommissioned and restored; that a bond would cover the expense of this effort; and that full restoration to agricultural use would  be completed.

They also responded with the following points to concerns they say they have heard about preserving farmland:

·       The land will remain in agricultural zoning

·       100% of the landowners intend to continue farming (“in different locations,” per the BayWa team)

·       The project comprises .42 percent of the Orange County prime farmland

·       The plan for putting in pollinator plants will increase crop yields at surrounding farms

·       They will offer local jobs training for beekeeping

Following the BayWa presentation, the commissioners asked questions and made comments.

Our recommendation is that anyone interested in learning about the project should watch the video in order to hear the give and take between the commissioners and the applicant. The following is a condensed summary of the commissioners’ questions and the BayWa team’s responses reconstructed from notes. Please watch the video for full questions and answers.

Commissioner questions (PC) and BayWa responses (BW) are grouped by topic below.

Decommissioning

(PC) Will it make money?

               (BW) There will be recycling and reuse of materials. Current estimates indicate high resale value.

(PC) Will there be a full restoration if the company pulls out early?

               (BW) Regrading would restore the contours of the land that were existant prior to construction. Removal of parts/equipment. Restoring land where the project roads were put in place unless the landowner wants the roads to remain.

(PC) Who is the 3rd party involved in the decommissioning bond?

               (BW) There would be a 501(c)3 created with a county created board to disseminate the funds.

(PC) Will the soil be decompacted at decommissioning?

               (BW) Yes, the site will be restored to its former/preexisting condition.

(PC) Will you sell decommissioned panels as usable secondhand?

               (BW) It’s an option. Decommissioning is not yet happening at scale in the US.

Project site

(PC) Request more buffer for homes.

               (BW) There is a 100” foot commitment for buffer from the fenceline (50’ vegetation, 50’ space)

(PC) Is the project land purchased?

               (BW) There is one lease and one option to purchase. We are not a long-term real estate holding company. The option to purchase is because that may work for the landowner.

(PC) Is this a long term investment?

               (BW) There’s a possibility town long term. There is an active market for these assets. Safe & consistent capital.

Environmental & habitat concerns

(PC) Wildlife corridors … are they overlaid on wetlands?

               (BW) Yes, some are also on electric and gas easements. Trees will be left for wildlife, these are not identified as formal corridors.

(PC) What is the estimate on the amount of topsoil disturbance?

               (BW) There is a preliminary grading plan. A lot of changes are affecting grading right now. Less than half the project will be touched by grading. Strip, stockpile, grade, reapply.

(PC) Drainage and stormwater. In the newspaper there are stories of catastrophic run-off at solar plants. Any after action? Are the stories true? What are you doing to avoid runoff?

               (BW) Engineer has 7 years of experience (2017). Can be done right. There are code minimums. DEQ regs are changing to help hold back more water and sediment. DEQ wants more inspectors in the field. Doesn’t anticipate a lot of open land disturbance. Contractors <on projects with stormwater issues>  may not have had experience, never came back to engineer.

(PC) Will there be wetlands disturbance?

               (BW) There will be wetlands crossings, 5 potentially.

Project-related benefits

(PC) Is there a potential cost decrease to the end user of the electricity? A tangible figure?

               (BW) Unlikely to be a tangible benefit. Electricity goes to the larger transmission grid/PJM.

(PC) According to the website, the project  will deliver clean and inexpensive energy to the Orange County region.

               (BW) Electricity goes to “first point called” (this was not explained; an explanation was begun but was interrupted by the commissioner with another question)

(PC) What is the difference in income to the county between the tax implications and the siting agreement?

               (BW) Need to confirm. Siting agreement is in addition to property taxes.

Panels

(PC) Where are the panels manufactured?

               (BW) Highly dependent on US manufacturing capability currently. Still scaling up. We’re interested in domestic/local manufacture and workforce to the extent we can. Hopeful we’ll be able to utilize.

(PC) So, made in America, maybe not?

               (BW) Correct.

(PC) What is the life of the panels? Power output over the life of the panel?

               (BW) Manufacturer’s specifications show .5% decrease per year. Should last entire life of project. Panels at end of life will be resold.

(PC) Regarding chemical runoff. Are the panels ASTM certified? How do we know they don’t release toxic runoff?

               (BW) Panels are highly regulated. Same types of panels you see everywhere, houses, farm fields. Generally the composition is all the same. Cadmium telluride is the outlier. Again, highly regulated. Studies have looked at cadmium telluride and other panels. If they crack, they are completely inert. Tested. A lot these meet EPA TCLIP standards, what landfills can accept. <Note: TCLIP s Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Prodedure>

(PC) What about hail? (Reference to recent storm in Texas that broke panels.)

               (BW) Don’t know project specifically. Was it tested? Project on Federal land that tornado ripped through, Nevada? Scrutiny. Were cadmium telluride panels. Nothing above normal limits. (Note: possibly Desert Sunlight Solar in Nevada, 2015 tornado)

BayWa

(PC) Where is your US office and your corporate headquarters?

               (BW) US office is in California. Corporate office is in Munich, Germany.

Economic Impact Study

(PC) Can you address the study’s indication that there will be 185 jobs for Orange County and 400+ for the state of Virginia?

               (BW) 185 jobs for Orange will be construction. 400+ for VA will be consultants, transporters, logistics, vendors outside o the county.

(PC) What about long term jobs in Orange County?

               (BW) 3-8 in Orange County. 5 outside of Orange County but in VA. Typically project operations and management, potentially remote management.

Public safety: Glare study, traffic and crime

(PC) Access points – how do project vehicles enter on True Blue?

               (BW) Old Office to True Blue <initial statement. Followed by:> Most traffic will be 522 to True Blue. Will use Oak Green entry too.

(PC) The sightline on 522 at True Blue is bad. Has VDOT been informed?

               (BW) Haven’t talked to VDOT specifically about the intersection. The site plan process is when details get looked into.

(PC) Traffic: the application said traffic analysis is not warranted. We want more on the traffic angle. We want a deeper dive prior to the site plan.

               (BW) Don’t know traffic numbers. Might want more entrances.

(PC) There were two glare analyses. Can you explain the difference?

               (BW) Two different systems: tracker vs. fixed. Trackers can be adjusted slightly to help shade panel behind. <the rest of the explanation was not captured by notes.>

(PC) Was glare at homes checked?

               (BW) Houses, perimeter, roads. Like looking at water. It’s quick light with glare. Early morning, late afternoon potential.

               (PC) I didn’t’ see the study from homes.

Viewshed

(PC) Were there photos of the viewshed from 522? Modeling a car traveling north on 522?

               (BW) There are additional renderings on the project website that we can share.

(PC) There’s a need for more viewshed simulations. Remark about visual simulations with other projects. Binder with simulations for every home. Needs to be stepped up.      

Agriculture

(PC) Are you aware that the project is in the AVA that was named best in the world by Wine Spectator magazine?

(PC) Reference to pollinator mix and beekeeping. Will you allow people to have beehives?

               (BW) The Bee & Butterfly Fund has a list of local beekeepers who can be hired to put hives on the property outside of the fenceline.

(PC) What is the grass maintenance plan?

               (BW) Looking at grazing sheep.

(PC) Project’s location is in Monticello AVA wine region. Named as best in the world by Wine Spectator.

               (BW) Unaware.

Please watch the video here. It is worth hearing the full exchange.

Our expectation is that the applicant will be at the next Planning Commission meeting on May 4 to provide answers to the commissioners’ questions. It is not clear yet whether there will be  public comment at the May meeting. Meeting information and related files will be posted here.

Daily Progress article on Orange County solar deliberations

In the wake of ESA Solar pulling their application earlier in March, the Daily Progress shared an article on Orange County's solar deliberations.

March 26, 2024 article written by Emily Hemphill.

"The future of solar energy looks dim in Orange County.

Last month, the county’s planning commission voted 4-1 to recommend the board of supervisors deny a special use permit request from ESA Solar. Despite losing this critical vote and facing significant community backlash, the Maitland, Florida-based solar developer was still optimistic about its prospect in front of the board to construct a 35-acre community solar farm.

ESA’s hopes were dashed when, one week later, the board of supervisors unanimously shot down another developer’s application for a special use permit, this one for Austin, Texas-based RWE Clean Energy’s 17-acre Cunningham Springs Solar project off Monrovia Road about a quarter-mile outside the town of Orange. What made the denial all that more significant, Cunningham Springs had received the full support of the Planning Commission which had recommended the board approve the project.

To read the full article, please visit: https://dailyprogress.com/news/community/orangenews/the-future-is-dim-for-solar-developments-in-orange-county/article_80aa5a40-e7e9-11ee-8e54-53487c1362d8.html