• Protecting Water and Farmland in Simcoe County

Solar story misleading

By
In Energy
Sep 29th, 2010
0 Comments
1607 Views

Letter to the Barrie Examiner – September 29 2010
Recurrent Energy, which is developing clean energy projects on lands leased from local owners, would like to respond to some of the points raised in this article. We recognize that farming is important to Ontario. And we are committed to returning the land that will be used for the solar farms to the owners in as good or better condition as it is today. The land is being leased from local farmers and families, who can farm these lands again at the end of the solar farm contract, if they so choose.
Solar farms are clean and quiet and use no fuels or chemicals and generate no odours. To reiterate, Recurrent Energy is committed to ensuring that the quality of the agricultural land is maintained or improved during the life of the solar power system.
Under the Green Energy Act, the province of Ontario has taken a leadership position in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and pollution while protecting Ontario’s important agricultural resources.
The rules of the Ontario Power Authority’s program, for which these solar power projects are being developed, prohibit the use of the best land zoned agricultural (Class 1 and 2), but allow for solar farms on poorer quality soils.
Some farmers oppose this policy because it limits their property rights by dictating how they can use their own land, and some farm protectionists oppose the policy because they believe all arable land should be used for food production, regardless of whether it makes economic sense.
Nevertheless, the solar farms proposed by Recurrent Energy have never been proposed for and will not be built on restricted Class 1 or 2 agricultural lands in order to adhere to the provincial policy.
We also wish to provide clarification regarding the proposed solar farm near London that was referenced in your article.
Recurrent Energy and the OPA determined that the site was not eligible under the rules of the program and we voluntarily withdrew the project. That specific project was proposed to be built on Class 3 and poorer quality soils, and would have avoided all Class 1 and 2 land.
The OPA does not question the accuracy of the analysis done by the OMAFRA-licensed soil scientist, but the OPA policy limited the use of the analysis in determining eligibility of the site.
We have confirmed with the OPA that there are no similar issues on any other Recurrent Energy projects in Oro-Medonte Township or elsewhere in Ontario.Recurrent Energy will continue to work with the community to address their concerns and ensure the preservation of farmland for future generations.
Sheldon Kimber Recurrent Energy

Leave a Reply

Commenters must post under real names. AWARE Simcoe reserves the right to edit or not publish comments. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *