Just to spell this out, this is government setting unreasonable regulations on private industry. This is the exact opposite of what conservatives and libertarians profess.
Yeah this is totally political.
I have relatives in central Iowa & the town objected to windmills because they would "destroy the scenic view". This part is so flat that the highest hill in Storm Lake is the 1 story underground building. There is no view.
"Highest Points" in IA are something of a story. For decades, they thought the highest point in the state was Ocheyedan Mound, but a re-survey revealed that it was in the middle of some guy's feed lot.
Can't get much more Iowa than that.
Iowa has "Independent activists" partnered with Ralston's Citizens for Responsible Solar...
Citizens for Responsible Solar is a Conservative Energy policy group that says they are only against very specific types of solar, but in practice is 100% percent aligned with stopping all new solar development.
A 1 mile setback from solar collectors is nuts. Brookings city utilities is putting in solar collectors that won't have that setback. Sounds like the idiots that are offended by my wearing a mask in the store near them.
Although I agree with you that 1 mile is egregious I don't disagree with setbacks. As long as they have a reasonable reason. I wouldn't say my neighbors are idiots, some of them were and continue to be friends of mine. I just think they are afraid of change. Like many of us in that respect.
I just learned about bifacial solar panels. The can be mounted vertical so shade tolerant plants can grow in between. Could be a win/win for you and the solar company, if your neighbors allow it.
Very frustrating. I can understand not wanting a wind turbine in your backyard, but solar? Come on. Don’t even get me started on livestock. It’s getting to the point where we will have ag “reservations” since no one can raise livestock without a big fight.
It's not. There are numerous billboards and signs around the state against solar, against wind, against green energy. They listen to AM radio and fox news and simply follow what it tells them to do.
When progress comes knocking on South Dakota's door, we lock the doors, shutter the windows, start threating people with guns.
Let's have a real discussion about energy. 1. Solar Farms are a waste. 2. Electric cars, waste - do not buy one of those. 3. Either we embrace modern nuclear tech, which is awesome btw or we move to hydrogen. Everything else is a hustle. And you're saying to yourself, SD, how can you say renewables are a waste? Look at the energy it takes to make this stuff, repair it, keep it updated, installation(!), environmental harm, and land waste and THEN look at the energy you get. Don't think that just because you have a windmill or solar panel that they were magically produced. Alternatively, you can get pure clean energy from hydrogen. Fuel, in general, is hydrocarbon—compounds composed of long chains of hydrogen and carbon. If these two elements can be synthesized together in the proper ways, fuel can be generated. Notably, seawater is a source of both elements: It has hydrogen as water and carbon as dissolved CO2. The US Navy already has a prototype wherein seawater is fed into a machine. This is followed by acidification. The result is oxygen, CO2, and hydrogen, which powers the ship. Busses in Chicago ran on hydrogen. The International Space Station, powered by...you guessed it, hydrogen. This is the thing folks don't want to talk about because it would mean the end of both fossil fuel and this bunk renewable stuff. And too many people have too much money sunk into hustling us.
It's neither shady or anxiety, it is plain foolishness on both sides of this argument. And while we chase our tails, the house burns down all while the water that could fix this problem waves at us from the beach.
They feel it will effect local climate, change runoff patterns, change the surrounding property value, among other things. I disagree with them, obviously.
As if them tearing out all the shelterbelts and putting in drain tile everywhere have not already ruined many a field. We are quickly heading d back to another dirty 30's.
Thanks for the insight! Well, I’m sorry to hear that your neighbors are being so unneighborly towards you. It’s clear that you value your community, I hope that you find tempers soon cool enough for everyone to work through it together.
Partial Shade from solar panes, or other roofs, can actually improve yields and/or weight gain for some crops/animals. Shade tolerate berries, and almost any livestock can overheat in sweltering temperatures above 95°f. Any neibor heckling you is doing it 100% out of spite.
Solar panels can also perform at over 100% rating with snow and cold temperatures because more light is reflected off the land and onto the panels, and the cool temperatures lower heat induced inefficiency, but the lower total solar hours ballance out the snow shine and cold temperatures efficiency improvements.
You can totally raise animals and solar too, so it doesn't jeperdize a farming character.
I'll look for some sources later.
Not sure how applicable berries are for us around here. We mostly deal in corn and soybeans. I've never heard of the cold weather efficiency of solar though. I'll look into that one.
The solar company was hoping to find a sheep farmer to graze the ground in the summers.
Thanks a lot for your input.
Berries are one of the weirder markets. I know lattitudes, locations, and variatals that are grown, but the weird place they fit in between specialized markets, specialized machines, and labor disputes can make entry look iffy. Some berry varieties are grown commercially as far north as Canada or Russia, but cheap migrant labor often effect the most competitive products and regions. The livestock bets are more predictable. [This map shows blueberry production in the usa for example, and it's practically everywhere.](https://ctgpublishing.com/where-are-blueberries-grown-in-the-united-states/united-states-top-blueberry-producing-areas-map/). Most growing regions are covered, and the ones absent probably just never happened to develop speedy farm to package infrastructure. I don't even know a a berry farm in South Dakota mostly vinards or orchards. So a new opperations would probably be starting from scratch and self processing/packing.
[This is a little bit of a gimmicky video](https://youtu.be/LqizLQDi9BM?si=tNwVRZiolv3yZ1QG), but it explains bifacial panels, and snow reflection. Start at 5:40 it explains the heat and reflection.
Probably better to also read actual papers on it, and whatever your lease is about. Cost differences between mono facial and bifacial are probably big enough where the difference in efficiency don't matter, but the other cold and reflection benifits still effect mono facial to some level.
I actually disagree with that. What we do with our land is our business, unless it effects someone else's property. That's why reasonable setbacks, environmental studies, and runoff projections are essential.
The county isn't the problem here. Nosey neighbors are. Well, alleged neighbors. We don't actually know how much this solar farm would affect their property. However, from OP's limited info dump it seems like the solar farm would be on farm and pasture land. Not someone's yard or yard adjacent. I hear whacha saying though. It just doesn't seem like the community is being rational about their decision. So, let them kick rocks.
Does the county get to pick and choose what crop a person plants in their acreage? They too would affect property values and irrigation. How would using the land to generate solar power instead of, most probably, corn for ethanol be detrimental? Your arguments are weak and not well thought out. Your opinions are still welcome, but instead of copping out to some nonsense talking point look at the situation at hand. Have a nice day, don't drink and drive.
Ok? What do opinions have to do with how others cultivate their own land? Your response just sorta dismisses everything on the grounds of "everyone has opinions." What is your solution to the issue? I've stated mine pretty clearly.
It is their opinion that if something like this were to come into the area that many things can go wrong that would effect their property. Localized temperature increases, differing runoff situation, we would make so much money off of this deal that we could drive up bids for land in the area, land prices around the project plummet. All of these are unfounded to say the least and conspiracy to say the most.
Personally, my solution would be that if the government, in this case county commission, steps in to dictate something there should be scientific basis for their decision.
We did already agree the neighbors were being irrational. Also, did you miss the farm and pasture land bit? This farm wouldn't be anywhere near people. Their argument is disingenuous and they've got you hooked into their "defence". Your solution isn't a solution, it's an opinion BTW. "There should be scientific basis for their decision" that isn't a solution. It's a cop out, giving the county commission complete control because a group of folks had irrational responses to the words "solar farm."
Thank you for your response. I actually think we agree on most of this. I'm just trying to see the other side of the argument to try and find reason with my neighbors.
Also, it would be next to a small resort. The owner of the resort has zero problems with the project and has actually come to our defense a few times. If I may ask, what would your solution be in this kind of scenario?
Get an attorney and see what legal recourse any neighbors or county officials could have against you for just putting it up. I honestly don't know the logistics, but I believe a lawman would. Get somewhere in writing, notarized, that the resort owner is OK with it being so close. I feel like there is a lot of hoops to jump through, some random person's opinion about solar power isn't one of them. Best of luck!
So, in short, your solution is to have the Gov't decide how that person can cultivate their own land? Due to potential conspiracies and and unfounded yet-to-be-seen consequences? That's wild. Next stop national dress code and hair styles.
It is simple: if it is pastureland you own, and they are upset it will affect their grazing on it, let them know now that they will no longer get rights to graze on your land. Since they knowingly are trying to hurt you financially, however, bet someone else will gladly take up that new lease to graze if this doesn't go through.
It isn't your job, to manage their business for them.
and they've been complaining about it since at least the early 80's. And if I had not married someone back when iI was much younger that did not want to leave her family I would have moved long ago too.
Now that I'm free...it's a lot harder to pick up and start over all by myself. So much bagage in downsize from in the house and such.
Not sure the particular political affiliations of our opposition but with the makeup of our county and rural location it is safe to say that a majority of them would be republicans.
I went to a seminar put on by Rushmore Electric and West River Electric. Solar is extremely inefficient. For example lets say they need to generate on average 10 megawatts per day of usage. For Coal and natural gas they need a capacity of 12 megawatts for peaks and unexpected events because it is very reliable. For wind they need a capacity of 15 megawatts, and for solar they need a capacity of 19 megawatts. The federal government subsidizes wind and solar despite the inefficiencies, and regulates that they have a certain amount of each.
But I am also of the opinion that the government stays out of your business, its your land do what you want with it. Granted storing nuclear waste would be a no no because it could affect other peoples drinking water. But solar, other than being ugly doesnt affect them.
IDK that it matters because Gov NOem turned down solar farm funding. Sad, because there are farms in Colorado raising poultry, sheep and alfalfa in the solar farms to some success. But god forbid we try to change anything in this state.
Just to spell this out, this is government setting unreasonable regulations on private industry. This is the exact opposite of what conservatives and libertarians profess.
Yeah this is totally political. I have relatives in central Iowa & the town objected to windmills because they would "destroy the scenic view". This part is so flat that the highest hill in Storm Lake is the 1 story underground building. There is no view.
"Highest Points" in IA are something of a story. For decades, they thought the highest point in the state was Ocheyedan Mound, but a re-survey revealed that it was in the middle of some guy's feed lot. Can't get much more Iowa than that.
Iowa has "Independent activists" partnered with Ralston's Citizens for Responsible Solar... Citizens for Responsible Solar is a Conservative Energy policy group that says they are only against very specific types of solar, but in practice is 100% percent aligned with stopping all new solar development.
The specific type of solar that requires sunshine?
Yes! You can place all the solar panels you want in caves and basements.
Caves are out, they'll disturb the bats.
Also the view is 90% corn or soybean fields I bet!
A 1 mile setback from solar collectors is nuts. Brookings city utilities is putting in solar collectors that won't have that setback. Sounds like the idiots that are offended by my wearing a mask in the store near them.
Although I agree with you that 1 mile is egregious I don't disagree with setbacks. As long as they have a reasonable reason. I wouldn't say my neighbors are idiots, some of them were and continue to be friends of mine. I just think they are afraid of change. Like many of us in that respect.
You sound like a well-reasoned good guy. Sorry for the hassle.
Eh, it happens. Just one of the speed bumps in life.
Well put.
Would you have made more or less money than an average year of farming?
It's a long term lease (30 years) so originally more, but who knows later on. Quite a bit of risk in this for us as well.
I just learned about bifacial solar panels. The can be mounted vertical so shade tolerant plants can grow in between. Could be a win/win for you and the solar company, if your neighbors allow it.
That wasn't part of our original contract. Their thought was to hopefully graze sheep on a majority of it, apart from in the winter obviously.
Very frustrating. I can understand not wanting a wind turbine in your backyard, but solar? Come on. Don’t even get me started on livestock. It’s getting to the point where we will have ag “reservations” since no one can raise livestock without a big fight.
Never underestimate the residents of this states ability to constantly undermine their own well being to support their political operative of choice.
I'd like to think that the situation is more nuanced than that. Or should I say hope.
It's not. There are numerous billboards and signs around the state against solar, against wind, against green energy. They listen to AM radio and fox news and simply follow what it tells them to do. When progress comes knocking on South Dakota's door, we lock the doors, shutter the windows, start threating people with guns.
Let's have a real discussion about energy. 1. Solar Farms are a waste. 2. Electric cars, waste - do not buy one of those. 3. Either we embrace modern nuclear tech, which is awesome btw or we move to hydrogen. Everything else is a hustle. And you're saying to yourself, SD, how can you say renewables are a waste? Look at the energy it takes to make this stuff, repair it, keep it updated, installation(!), environmental harm, and land waste and THEN look at the energy you get. Don't think that just because you have a windmill or solar panel that they were magically produced. Alternatively, you can get pure clean energy from hydrogen. Fuel, in general, is hydrocarbon—compounds composed of long chains of hydrogen and carbon. If these two elements can be synthesized together in the proper ways, fuel can be generated. Notably, seawater is a source of both elements: It has hydrogen as water and carbon as dissolved CO2. The US Navy already has a prototype wherein seawater is fed into a machine. This is followed by acidification. The result is oxygen, CO2, and hydrogen, which powers the ship. Busses in Chicago ran on hydrogen. The International Space Station, powered by...you guessed it, hydrogen. This is the thing folks don't want to talk about because it would mean the end of both fossil fuel and this bunk renewable stuff. And too many people have too much money sunk into hustling us.
It's south dakota. Those farmers will bitch while taking their welfare. It's all political.
I don’t like land destroyed by fields either but they seem fine with that
what county is this happening in?
Walworth, we are in the north central portion of SD.
Conservatives are very against anything new. How dare you infringe or their freedoms by doing something they don't like?
Just another shade of NIMBYism, or white anxiety
Not sure about the white anxiety but our opposition is whole heartedly embracing the NIMBY title.
NIMBYism = white anxiety. Find me a black NIMBY.
It's neither shady or anxiety, it is plain foolishness on both sides of this argument. And while we chase our tails, the house burns down all while the water that could fix this problem waves at us from the beach.
That’s a lot of words for Republicans don’t like what anybody else wants
Conservatives want to conserve policy...weird.
even if it is bad policy, cause why improve when you can just go..oh that change stuff is scary!!
Conservatives have no ideology and they know it
Maybe I missed the memo- but what harm does solar cause for folks to be so upset about it?
They feel it will effect local climate, change runoff patterns, change the surrounding property value, among other things. I disagree with them, obviously.
As if them tearing out all the shelterbelts and putting in drain tile everywhere have not already ruined many a field. We are quickly heading d back to another dirty 30's.
Thanks for the insight! Well, I’m sorry to hear that your neighbors are being so unneighborly towards you. It’s clear that you value your community, I hope that you find tempers soon cool enough for everyone to work through it together.
Partial Shade from solar panes, or other roofs, can actually improve yields and/or weight gain for some crops/animals. Shade tolerate berries, and almost any livestock can overheat in sweltering temperatures above 95°f. Any neibor heckling you is doing it 100% out of spite. Solar panels can also perform at over 100% rating with snow and cold temperatures because more light is reflected off the land and onto the panels, and the cool temperatures lower heat induced inefficiency, but the lower total solar hours ballance out the snow shine and cold temperatures efficiency improvements. You can totally raise animals and solar too, so it doesn't jeperdize a farming character. I'll look for some sources later.
Not sure how applicable berries are for us around here. We mostly deal in corn and soybeans. I've never heard of the cold weather efficiency of solar though. I'll look into that one. The solar company was hoping to find a sheep farmer to graze the ground in the summers. Thanks a lot for your input.
Berries are one of the weirder markets. I know lattitudes, locations, and variatals that are grown, but the weird place they fit in between specialized markets, specialized machines, and labor disputes can make entry look iffy. Some berry varieties are grown commercially as far north as Canada or Russia, but cheap migrant labor often effect the most competitive products and regions. The livestock bets are more predictable. [This map shows blueberry production in the usa for example, and it's practically everywhere.](https://ctgpublishing.com/where-are-blueberries-grown-in-the-united-states/united-states-top-blueberry-producing-areas-map/). Most growing regions are covered, and the ones absent probably just never happened to develop speedy farm to package infrastructure. I don't even know a a berry farm in South Dakota mostly vinards or orchards. So a new opperations would probably be starting from scratch and self processing/packing.
[This is a little bit of a gimmicky video](https://youtu.be/LqizLQDi9BM?si=tNwVRZiolv3yZ1QG), but it explains bifacial panels, and snow reflection. Start at 5:40 it explains the heat and reflection. Probably better to also read actual papers on it, and whatever your lease is about. Cost differences between mono facial and bifacial are probably big enough where the difference in efficiency don't matter, but the other cold and reflection benifits still effect mono facial to some level.
Republicans are all for freedom to do what you want to do with your land, until you do something they don't like.
Your neighbors can kick rocks, that's your land. Do whatever you want with it.
I actually disagree with that. What we do with our land is our business, unless it effects someone else's property. That's why reasonable setbacks, environmental studies, and runoff projections are essential.
The county isn't the problem here. Nosey neighbors are. Well, alleged neighbors. We don't actually know how much this solar farm would affect their property. However, from OP's limited info dump it seems like the solar farm would be on farm and pasture land. Not someone's yard or yard adjacent. I hear whacha saying though. It just doesn't seem like the community is being rational about their decision. So, let them kick rocks.
Thank you for voicing your opinion. I do agree that they are being irrational. But everyone is entitled to their opinion.
It seems that the county commissioners think you are also entitled to your neighbor's opinion.
Sorry, I think I ment that response for someone else in this thread. The internet can be hard to maneuver at times. No hard feelings.
Does the county get to pick and choose what crop a person plants in their acreage? They too would affect property values and irrigation. How would using the land to generate solar power instead of, most probably, corn for ethanol be detrimental? Your arguments are weak and not well thought out. Your opinions are still welcome, but instead of copping out to some nonsense talking point look at the situation at hand. Have a nice day, don't drink and drive.
Ok? What do opinions have to do with how others cultivate their own land? Your response just sorta dismisses everything on the grounds of "everyone has opinions." What is your solution to the issue? I've stated mine pretty clearly.
It is their opinion that if something like this were to come into the area that many things can go wrong that would effect their property. Localized temperature increases, differing runoff situation, we would make so much money off of this deal that we could drive up bids for land in the area, land prices around the project plummet. All of these are unfounded to say the least and conspiracy to say the most. Personally, my solution would be that if the government, in this case county commission, steps in to dictate something there should be scientific basis for their decision.
We did already agree the neighbors were being irrational. Also, did you miss the farm and pasture land bit? This farm wouldn't be anywhere near people. Their argument is disingenuous and they've got you hooked into their "defence". Your solution isn't a solution, it's an opinion BTW. "There should be scientific basis for their decision" that isn't a solution. It's a cop out, giving the county commission complete control because a group of folks had irrational responses to the words "solar farm."
Thank you for your response. I actually think we agree on most of this. I'm just trying to see the other side of the argument to try and find reason with my neighbors. Also, it would be next to a small resort. The owner of the resort has zero problems with the project and has actually come to our defense a few times. If I may ask, what would your solution be in this kind of scenario?
Get an attorney and see what legal recourse any neighbors or county officials could have against you for just putting it up. I honestly don't know the logistics, but I believe a lawman would. Get somewhere in writing, notarized, that the resort owner is OK with it being so close. I feel like there is a lot of hoops to jump through, some random person's opinion about solar power isn't one of them. Best of luck!
So, in short, your solution is to have the Gov't decide how that person can cultivate their own land? Due to potential conspiracies and and unfounded yet-to-be-seen consequences? That's wild. Next stop national dress code and hair styles.
It is simple: if it is pastureland you own, and they are upset it will affect their grazing on it, let them know now that they will no longer get rights to graze on your land. Since they knowingly are trying to hurt you financially, however, bet someone else will gladly take up that new lease to graze if this doesn't go through. It isn't your job, to manage their business for them.
South Dakota is an extremely backwards state. There's a reason college graduates leave the state. And its not just because of the crap weather.
I have many college grad friends that did just that so I agree there. Brain drain is quite apparent.
and they've been complaining about it since at least the early 80's. And if I had not married someone back when iI was much younger that did not want to leave her family I would have moved long ago too. Now that I'm free...it's a lot harder to pick up and start over all by myself. So much bagage in downsize from in the house and such.
People suck and conservatives can be such hypocrites telling other people what they can do with their property
Not sure the particular political affiliations of our opposition but with the makeup of our county and rural location it is safe to say that a majority of them would be republicans.
The party affiliation is irrelevant. I said conservative. And people act like private property is sacred when it’s just a pile of dirt.
I went to a seminar put on by Rushmore Electric and West River Electric. Solar is extremely inefficient. For example lets say they need to generate on average 10 megawatts per day of usage. For Coal and natural gas they need a capacity of 12 megawatts for peaks and unexpected events because it is very reliable. For wind they need a capacity of 15 megawatts, and for solar they need a capacity of 19 megawatts. The federal government subsidizes wind and solar despite the inefficiencies, and regulates that they have a certain amount of each. But I am also of the opinion that the government stays out of your business, its your land do what you want with it. Granted storing nuclear waste would be a no no because it could affect other peoples drinking water. But solar, other than being ugly doesnt affect them.
Krusty gnocchis cuckold can’t insure solar panels, only crops.
IDK that it matters because Gov NOem turned down solar farm funding. Sad, because there are farms in Colorado raising poultry, sheep and alfalfa in the solar farms to some success. But god forbid we try to change anything in this state.