New York State Talks Out of Both Sides of Its Mouth on Solar As It Passes Out Big Bucks from You!
Our friend Roger Caiazza, the Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York, has posted some interesting information about New York State’s two-headed approach to agriculture. The state is handing out mega-bucks to encourage solar development on farmland. Roger asks a very relevant question:
What Am I Missing Here?
PV magazine notes that New York invests $5 million in agrivoltaics. They note:
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) announced that $5 million is now available for demonstration projects that co-locate solar and agriculture within the state. Each project can receive up to $750,000. The state aims to expand the body of knowledge on the technical and financial viability of solar agrivoltaic facilities.
Sounds good because the Hochul Administration has still not mandated that utility-scale solar developers meet the NYS Department of Agriculture & Markets (NYSDAM) prime farmland guideline: “The Department’s goal is for projects to limit the conversion of agricultural areas within the Project Areas, to no more than 10% of soils classified by the Department’s NYS Agricultural Land Classification mineral soil groups 1-4, generally Prime Farmland soils, which represent the State’s most productive farmland.”
Here is what I do not understand:
According to NYSERDA summary documentation, eligible crops, livestock, and livestock products include, but are not limited to:
Field crops, including corn, wheat, oats, rye, barley, hay, potatoes and dry beans.
Fruits, such as apples, peaches, grapes, cherries and berries.
Vegetables, such as tomatoes, snap beans, cabbage, carrots, beets and onions.
Horticultural specialties, including nursery stock, ornamental shrubs, ornamental trees, and flowers.
Livestock and livestock products, including cattle, sheep, hogs, goats, horses, poultry, ratites (such as ostriches, emus, rheas and kiwis), farmed deer, farmed buffalo, fur bearing animals, wool bearing animals (such as alpacas and llamas), milk, eggs, and furs.
Maple sap.
Christmas trees derived from a managed Christmas tree operation whether dug for transplanting or cut from the stump.
Aquaculture products, including fish, fish products, water plants and shellfish.
Woody biomass, which means short rotation woody crops raised for bioenergy, and does not include farm woodland.
Apiary products, including honey, beeswax, royal jelly, bee pollen, propolis, package bees, nucs and queens. “Nucs” are defined as small honeybee colonies created from larger colonies, including the nuc box – a smaller version of a beehive, designed to hold up to five frames from an existing colony.
Actively managed log-grown woodland mushrooms.
Industrial hemp as defined in Section 505.
Eligible crops include apples, peaches, cherries, maple trees, and Christmas trees? Trees will shade solar panels. So, this approach is inconsistent with my understanding that the intent of agrivoltaics was to use the farmland within the solar panels to try to make up for the loss of the productive farmland. The intent of the NYSDAM guideline won’t be addressed either. So what am I missing?
Editor’s Note: I don’t think you’re missing anything, Roger. New York, as usual, is talking out of both sides of its mouth as it passes out your money virtue signal. It’s just the way the Empire State works, sadly.
#Agriculture #Agrivoltaics #NewYork #NYSERDA #Solar #Hochul
Incompetence at it's finest. Looks like we in the states need to vet those incumbets a bit more thoroughly. Like, what experience they have to what they've promised in their advertising...
... Who really gives a rip about their education and political background anyways.
I am more inclined to say NYS is speaking out of both ends.