Lightsource BP withdrew its appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court regarding approval of its planned Birch Solar project. The large 300 MW solar facility was highly opposed by county residents, which prevented regulatory approval of the facility.
The solar developer said in a filing it has “elected to suspend further development of the solar facility at issue.”
Ohio state law has eight criterias for approving electric generation, including environmental impact studies, water conservation, agricultural impact studies, and whether the project serves electric system “economy and reliability” as well as the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.”
After heavy public opposition in the Republican county, regulators shut down Lightsource BP’s project, deeming it was not of the “public interest.”
The solar developer appealed that the Ohio Power Siting Board’s view of “public interest” was too narrow, and that it placed too much weight on local opposition, failing to take a broad view of the economic and service reliability benefits of the project.
Lightsource BP argued the local government and public comment was “a determining component” of assessing the project’s ability to meet the “public interest” requirement. It said that this interpretation violated Ohio state law by delegating the Ohio Power Siting Board’s legal authority to local governments.
“The Board never even assessed whether there would be any potential negative impacts to the public before deciding that the Project was not in the ‘public interest,’” said the Natural Resources Defense Council and a local chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
“Public opinion is not public interest,” said Lindsey Workman, community affairs manager for Vesper Energy, the developer for Kingwood Solar, another project facing regulatory hurdles in the state.
(Read: “Opposition stymies solar – sometimes”)
The Birch Solar project was expected to create 400 local jobs during construction and generate $2.7 million in annual revenue for schools, local, and county governments under a payment in lieu of taxes agreement.
The land currently generates less than $100,000 in annual taxes, but with Birch Creek, it was expected to generate up to $81 million in revenues for the community over the life of the project. The project additionally created a $500,000 community fund to support education, parks, emergency services, or other needs identified by the community.
The project represented a $337 million investment into clean energy infrastructure in Ohio. The clean power generated from the solar facility was expected to abate 423,700 metric tons of CO2 emissions.
The project’s withdrawal may set a precedent for blocking clean energy development in the state.
“Allowing the Board’s unprecedented and unreasonable decision on Birch Solar to stand will prevent the development of other well-planned renewable energy projects in Ohio,” the National Resources Defense Council said.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
By submitting this form you agree to pv magazine using your data for the purposes of publishing your comment.
Your personal data will only be disclosed or otherwise transmitted to third parties for the purposes of spam filtering or if this is necessary for technical maintenance of the website. Any other transfer to third parties will not take place unless this is justified on the basis of applicable data protection regulations or if pv magazine is legally obliged to do so.
You may revoke this consent at any time with effect for the future, in which case your personal data will be deleted immediately. Otherwise, your data will be deleted if pv magazine has processed your request or the purpose of data storage is fulfilled.
Further information on data privacy can be found in our Data Protection Policy.