Private Property Rights vs. Industrial Wind/Solar: Reply to Giberson

“The systemic opposition of the locals to massive solar arrays and wind farms has created a new class of environmentalists. They live in and support greenery over government machining their living space. In contrast, the Washington, D.C. ‘environmentalists’ lobby and push from their concrete jungle. Going green and private property rights are aligned against Big Brother.”

The exchange (on Facebook) began with a post by Kevon Martis on the community pushback regarding a 1,000+ MW solar installation in Sanilac County, Michigan (see picture below). “Proposed Solar Farms Cause Community Concerns” reported concerns over water drainage (a recurring issue), and lower property values. Incessant noise and other issues can cross property lines in the case of industrial solar also. This is one battleground of many hundreds, of which nearly 300 wind/solar projects have been rejected or delayed in the U.S. alone.

Martis posted:

“Sanilac county conducted a study looking into how the development of alternative energy farms on working agricultural land could impact the community’s economy. The study showed that for every one-percent of agricultural ground lost to solar and wind development, there is a $6.4 million economic loss to the community.

The study showed that 47% of the survey’s respondents strongly opposed large-scale solar energy development in Sanilac County. When asked whether they supported solar energy development in Sanilac County if it displaced agricultural land, 63% of respondents said they strongly opposed it. The main reasons centered on the loss of agricultural land and the impact solar farms would have on property values.”

——————–

Michael Giberson of R Street posted a question for Martis:

If the property owner wants the solar power installation, on what grounds should neighbors and county officials (i.e., people who do not own the property) be able to interfere?

To which I responded: “a wholly government-enabled project paid in part by Martis and other taxpayers—and that weakens the grid (intermittency)—deserves a lot of scrutiny, don’t you think?”

Giberson responded: “[Does] this standard also apply to farmers wanting to grow corn ending up in gasoline? Can neighbors stop corn growing?”

To which I answered:

On the ethanol analogy, there are several weaknesses. First, ethanol has a niche as an oxygenate in a free market–the mandate is what is the problem. Wheat for any use (including bread) is rather ordinary on the countryside–and quite different from an industrial wind turbine or a solar ‘farm.’ Is there another analogy that might work better?

Giberson: No analogy is perfect, but if mandates that can cause downstream problems is the issue both solar and corn share that feature. Solar has a free market niche, too. And, in both cases, using local interventions/impositions on property rights is an ineffective tool for addressing problematic federal problems. Local officials are, for the most part, not prepared to fix regional or federal electric power policy failures. We ought not empower them to try.

Bradley: First, we are speaking about solar farms, not off-grid solar applications that do have a free market niche. So your analogy with ethanol and solar farms is errant. Is there another analogy? …. Second, is there any reason to favor solar farms such as the above against grassroots opposition?

Giberson: Yes obviously there is a reason to favor property owners doing what they want with their property no matter what the neighbors think. Sure, thousands of local governments violate this presumption of personal liberty, but let’s not encourage this sort of thing.

By the way, I have the same view for natural gas pipelines. If someone is willing to host one on their own property, no amount of grassroots opposition should overcome the owners’ prerogatives. (Neighbors have a reasonable interest in the pipeline being operated in a manner that does not place their own property at risk, but that’s about it. A local solar farm is unlikely a direct threat to the neighbors.)

Bradley: You have shifted the debate from your analogy about ethanol. Wheat is wheat; and a (government, taxpayer) central-station solar array does not ‘blow in the breeze.’ Is there another analogy? The natural gas pipeline analogy is different because the pipe is below ground and is not government enabled. (Homestead theory can also apply.)

“A local solar farm is unlikely a direct threat to the neighbors.” This is erroneous, and the local authorities with flood control and drainage responsibilities are concerned in the post above. Near where I live, this issue is an important one.

Giberson: No response ….

————————-

This is an interesting debate. Private property is one thing; a private party entering into a contract with a government-enabled party that introduces harms for neighbors–each of whom are involved as taxpayers (via ITC for solar)–is another.

Giberson’s analogy with ethanol failed on close inspection; a solar farm (or industrial wind turbine) is another animal than wheat growing. I have (unsuccessfully) asked for another analogy or example that makes the private property right of a hosting a solar or wind project immune from the harms imposed on the private property rights of neighbors. (He is invited to add a comment on here at MasterResource to hash out the issues in more detail.)

Giberson opined against local opposition to federal energy policies. But if the policies pit energy freedom against energy statism, under a private property perspective, it would seem to be both appropriate and strategic to push back against Big Brother. And devolved government–that seems very appropriate where the locals can seek grassroot checks for Rank Statism that threatens them via electricity rates and power outages.

Another question for Giberson. If private property rights (as he defends them) are sacrosanct in the case above, what about the property rights of an investor-owned electric utility’s transmission property (the mandatory open access issue). Or a gas ban in the home, surely the most private of private property and a frontal assault on basic energy freedom. If Giberson pulls out the ‘market failure’ argument against utilities, he should also consider ‘government failure’ in the rights of competing private property owners.

———————-

The irony of it all. Environmentalists used to be against long transmission lines–now they worship them to get wind and solar from nowhere to somewhere. Environmentalists used to be against sprawl–but wind and solar are the very definition of industrial sprawl. And capitalist cronyism–the wind/solar rent-seekers are somehow the good business leaders.

The systemic opposition of the locals to massive solar arrays and wind farms has created a new class of environmentalists. They live in and support greenery over government machining their living space. In contrast, the Washington, D.C. ‘environmentalists’ lobby and push from their concrete jungle with a different green. Going green and private property rights are well aligned against Big Brother when it comes to on-grid wind/solar.

———————-

Appendix: MasterResource posts on grassroot environmentalism

Wind-financed Exposé against Kevon Martis Backfires (May 1, 2023)

Are Grassroot Wind/Solar Foes ‘Cultish’? (Peter Sinclair vs. Kevon Martis again) (March 3, 2023)

No! to New York Wind in the Great Lakes (NYS Energy Research and Development Authority verdict) (January 9, 2023)

Industrial Wind Turbines: Report from Ground Zero (March 24, 2022)

“As Anti-Wind Zoning Ordinances Spread Across Michigan” (grass-root environmentalists vs. energy sprawl) (February 10, 2022)

Martis in the Solar and Wind Fight: The Latest (August 30, 2021)

Martis vs. Smucker: Industrial Wind on Defense (July 16, 2021)

Kevon Martis: Common-good Foe of Industrial Solar and Wind (July 27, 2020)

Wind and Solar Ramp-up Problematic (July 28, 2020)

Big Wind Throws in the Towel in Lapeer County, Michigan (June 3, 2020)

New York’s Cuomo vs. the Grassroots on Wind & Solar (March 11, 2020)

Tom Stacy On Wind Power: At the (Ohio) Grassroots (September 20, 2017)

Grassroots: NO to the Wind PTC (December 9, 2015)

Wind2050: A Dystopian Society? (Vestas, et al. go Orwellian against anti-windpower grassroots) (March 4, 2014)

National Wind Watch: Organizing the Grassroots Against Industrial Wind (April 1, 2011)

Beyond NIMBY: A Grassroots Strategy to Defeat Windpower (May 29, 2010)

The post Private Property Rights vs. Industrial Wind/Solar: Reply to Giberson appeared first on Master Resource.