MA Clean Energy Siting Bill Retains Language Harmful to Rural Towns

Photo by Kenny Cinders on Unsplash

Our Massachusetts legislators started their summer break after passing a last-minute state budget and leaving a stack of legislation pending until their return in September.

One of the unfinished bills is “An Act upgrading the grid and protecting ratepayers”, S2838, passed by the Senate on June 25, 2024, and the House version, H4884 passed on July 17. The two chambers were unable to agree on a unified version before July 31.

For residents in Western Massachusetts, it appears evident that language limiting local authority over the siting of clean energy projects remains in both versions of the bill and is likely to be enacted into law.

The Massachusetts Plan for Net-Zero Emissions by 2050

As part of the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2050, Governor Maura Healy created the Commission on Clean Energy Infrastructure Siting and Permitting on September 26, 2023. The new entity comprised representatives from various state agencies, municipalities, electric utilities, the clean energy industry, environmental justice organizations, and land use advocates. The group's purpose was to recommend ways to expedite the permitting process for clean energy infrastructure projects.

In April 2024, the Commission released its recommendations. New clean energy projects were defined as “solar, wind and anaerobic digestion facilities; storage facilities; and transmission and distribution infrastructure.” Local, state, and regional permits for larger projects of 25 megawatts or more for solar, wind, or anaerobic digestion facilities and 100 or more megawatts for energy storage facilities would be combined and issued by the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB). The EFSB is supported by the Department of Public Utilities, which “oversees investor-owned electric power, natural gas, and water companies in Massachusetts.”  The EFSB must issue the consolidated permit within 15 months of receipt.

For smaller projects of fewer than 25 megawatts for solar, wind, and anaerobic digestion facilities, all local permits must be rolled into a single permit and issued in less than a year. State agencies will create standards to “guide municipalities in the issuance of permits for clean energy infrastructure.”  

The Western MA Solar Forums and the Forests as Climate Solutions Initiative

Between June 2023 and June 2024, several events took place including the Western MA Solar Forums (parts I & II) and the Forests as Climate Solutions Initiative. The solar forums were held weekly in September 2023, and the last forum took place in December. The second part of the solar discussions occurred on June 4, 2024. These events were open to the public and aimed to gather citizen input on the roles of renewable energy and forests in combating climate change.

I attended all the forums and was impressed with the first part, which I found informative and supportive of protecting forests and woodlands while developing solar facilities. 

The speakers discussed the challenges that community and residential solar are currently facing. Community action groups raised concerns about the lack of solar equity for low-income residents and the lack of transparency in the decision-making process of the Department of Public Utilities. A representative from the Attorney General’s Office talked about deceptive marketing and sales practices in the community solar sector, which led to customers overpaying for their share of a community solar farm. 

He also mentioned many Massachusetts residents filing complaints about residential solar scams involving aggressive door-to-door sales tactics and unfulfilled solar panel installations. These scammers often target the elderly, low-income, and those with language barriers.

Following the conclusion of the initial forum in December, there was a prevailing sentiment among speakers and the public that solar development should prioritize built environments such as rooftops and parking lots, and steer away from industrial solar projects that necessitate the clearing of forested lands.

The second part of the solar forums took place in June 2024, after the Commission released its recommendations. This event spent much time explaining that guidance and asking for public feedback on its content. It was a more focused discussion that seemed designed to “sell” the Commission’s recommendations to the public. Toward the end of the forum, speaker presentations spoke of “nimbyism”. They gave the impression that western Massachusetts communities should stop complaining about local control and do their fair share to help the state attain its energy goals.

While the foregoing is my opinion of the proceedings, the published comments and feedback show that many respondents were concerned that Boston would have a heavy hand in decisions affecting Western MA residents. The references to “local input” in the Commission’s recommendations did nothing to assuage the fears that the forests we live in would bear the brunt of the state’s accelerated clean energy plans.

In January 2024, the Climate Forestry Committee released its report on conserving forest lands, and the following June,  the state released its response to that report.  The committee’s report notes the state’s clean energy plan aims to protect “30% of Massachusetts lands by 2030 and 40% by 2050, much of that land to be forested (which entails doubling the recent pace of land protection).” One way to attain this goal is to pursue “policies to avoid conversion of forest land (e.g., siting of solar, housing, and other development).” 

Similarly, the state’s response notes, “To reach net zero by 2050 the Commonwealth will look to forests to sequester approximately half of the projected residual emissions. As such, forests are an essential climate solution to the Commonwealth.” 

Solar Siting: Public v. Private land

One issue never fully addressed at the forums is that installing solar on built environments is more costly than encouraging large, private landowners to lease their land to big solar companies. 

The city of Boston and its environs host many public buildings, parking lots, and vacant land that could be hosting solar panels. But it’s more expensive to install solar on built environments than it is to clear trees and put up industrial solar. This is especially true when it won’t cost Massachusetts a dime to put solar farms on land owned by the largest private landowner in the state.

The state wants to pretend that all municipalities in Massachusetts are similar and that the issue of local control affects all equally. This is untrue, and Western MA residents know it. We have spoken out against the hefty burden we are being made to bear for decisions made at the state capitol, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

Though both versions contain the troublesome siting language, there is still time to register your thoughts about this legislation. Contact your legislators and let them know we need them to ensure that local energy projects are administered by the people who will live with them–not a faceless Boston-based committee.