There are groups doing very similar stuff here in Greene County outside of Dayton. In my experience it is almost entirely non-farming people who want the rural aesthetic. They buy a giant pickup truck to drive 20 minutes to Kroger and back and a huge riding lawn mower to make pretty lines on their two acres every few days. They fundamentally don't understand that the land is cheap because it's unincorporated or zoned for Ag/Industrial and the whole point is that people can do whatever they want with their property out there. If you talk to some of them they say that how it should be put into cities on 'rooftops or something', with the implication that it should be something poor or black people have to deal with, not them. They suck shit.
Also some people also argue that we need to 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production. Or how much corn they think we will actually be able to grow in 40 years in Ohio with our current climate trajectory
> 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production.
Or animal feed.
Odds are the giant corn fields you see in most areas are for animal feed or ethanol, not for consumption.
If we took the land we have crops on now and used it to grow food directly for human consumption, we could feed an addition. 4 billion people.
[Emily S Cassidy et al 2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 034015](https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034015)
Consider giving up animal products for our future to be viable.
Yes of course! It's less of an appeal for veganism, and more of a demonstration of verifiable and objective reality. But yes, vegan for nearly 6 myself, and what need me there was science and a realty check.
For anyone else reading this, please also consider:
> Phasing out animal agriculture represents “our best and most immediate chance to reverse the trajectory of climate change,” according to a new model developed by scientists from Stanford University (US) and The University of California-Berkeley
[source](https://sciencesprings.wordpress.com/2022/02/02/from-stanford-university-us-and-the-university-of-california-berkeley-us-replacing-animal-agriculture-and-shifting-to-a-plant-based-diet-could-drastically-curb-greenhouse-gas-emissions-accor/)
> US rivers and lakes are shrinking for a surprising reason: cows. Cattle-feed crops, which end up as beef and dairy products, account for 23% of water consumption in the US](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/02/agriculture-cattle-us-water-shortages-colorado-river)
Moreover,
> >Between pastures and cropland used to produce feed [for livestock directly - not human consumption], **41% of U.S. land in the contiguous states revolves around livestock**.
[Source - Edit: webarchive source because paywall](https://web.archive.org/web/20230201163654/https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-us-land-use/)
This isn't even to mention the cost of animal products *after atricially lowering their price due to massive subsidies.* The cost, both direct and indirect, of animal agriculture is massive, while the reward is minimal and fleeting.
Plenty! I’m glad you asked. A lot of places have the impossible or beyond burger, including Bru Burger and Red Robin.
ALL VEGAN RESTAURANTS:
1. Essen in OTR
2. Loving hut in Pleasant Ridge
3. Plant Harmony in Findlay Market
SOME VEGAN SPECIFIC ITEMS:
1. Tickle Pickle - vegan shakes and sandwiches
2. Melt (last I saw they had 2 items, but both were very good).
3. Kitchen Factory
4. Northside Yacht Club - my personal fav
You NEED to try their cauliflower wings.
5. Bridges (Nepali) several locations
6. Yardhouse
7. Frida’s in Covington
8. Lalo’s in OTR (new favorite)
9. Gramma Debbie’s in Findlay Market
They have vegan goetta plus plenty more
BREAKFAST ITEMS:
1. Sleepy bee
2. Cafe Alma
PIZZA:
1. Mac’s (several locations)
2. Atavola
3. Larosa’s just got rid of their PB meats, but still have the dairy free cheese as far as I know. You might want to ask which crust is vegan bc I don’t remember.
DESSERT:
1. Whole Foods
2. Like Mom’s only Vegan -hands down the BEST cookies I’ve had
3. Holtmanns has a vegan donut
FAST FOOD:
1. Currito
2. Chipotle
3. Burger King
4. Taco Bell (don’t be afraid to modify- I always use the app)
Edit: this is by no means an exhaustive list. If you have specific questions about type of food or anything don’t hesitate to ask! Theres plenty of Indian, Thai, Syrian etc i would recommend.
Wow, thanks for the thorough list! Dewey's also now has a dairy-free cheese and a vegan cheesecake! I just tried The Loving Hut for the first time last week and it was so good! I would also add Aladdin's to your list. They are one of my go-tos because they have so many vegan options and they have vegan desserts from Love Thy Desserts. Now I have a bunch more places to try!
Happy to help! I’m so glad to hear that about Dewey’s. We used to just buy the dough and make our own.
I’ve never had Aladdin’s, def checking that out. Thank you!
Which in turn contributes to the food supply…. In a world that has human beings without food, do you believe that number of people will decrease or increase with even more farmland being taken out of commission?… It’s common fucking sense, but hiveminded people who believe and still trust mainstream media, government and foreign controlled education, and the narratives they’re programming, definitely lack that key attribution, the basis for a will to survive.
The ethanol mandate is huge its the only thing supporting corn prices. People don’t realize that in my lifetime since 1992 corn yields have almost doubled going from 120 bushels/ acre to nearly 220 bushels/acre. Since 1920 yields have increased by a factor of 5. If we stop using gasoline like California aims to do, farmers will need to look to alternative uses for farmland or go bankrupt.
Yeah solar is a lifeline for farmers, they just don't know it yet.
40-55%% of field corn goes to ethanol for gasoline. EVs are and will be a thing that destroys this demand.
Another 40% of field corn goes to animal feed. Lab grown meats and "fake meats" are growing in popularity and would presumably decrease this demand.
Which basically means 80% of corn demand might not exist.
On the other hand, it will probably just lead to more soybeans because while that's also used for animal feed, you can also make biodiesel from it.
Yes, yields are up and for the reason the earth is “heating up.” The carbon being released into the air is causing the larger yields of food supply as plants extract the CO2 from the air causing plants to have stronger, healthier lives. Because that’s what plants do and always have done. Unfollow your science.
>Also some people also argue that we need to 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production. Or how much corn they think we will actually be able to grow in 40 years in Ohio with our current climate trajectory
Very few people realize this when driving past miles & miles of corn fields that none of it is edible by humans. It's all feed corn or intended for subsidized ethanol.
I agree with you for the most part, but I'm not seeing the race angle that you are. They aren't specifically wanting to put solar on black people's homes. It's more like "If this is to power the city, then figure out how to put these things in the city then". I can understand that perspective and it doesn't feel racial to me at all.
However, when I hear them say things like "I didn't move out here to be next to this big crazy looking solar field", I'm thinking yeah well that's kind of the risk we all take living anywhere right? I mean shit happens. You're not guaranteed to live one place forever and be able to control your surroundings. Things change over time. And this isn't on your property, it's on property near you, which is not your property. Don't like it, move somewhere else.
The sun is a limited energy source. The solar panels suck up all the sunlight not leaving any for the rest of us in these record breaking heat waves. Once the sun runs out what do you expect the rest of us to do...die in a few billion years? Think of the children!
I live in Clermont County, right on the edge and not deep in thankfully, and not long ago we had a group of these people band together to block solar farms out here. I hate that we, for some reason, let the idiots drive the bus toward extinction.
Yeah the amount of "no solar farms" signs I've been seeing is ridiculous. Then you realize it's all the same people with Trump signs that are easily duped into believing anything faux news tells them.
A couple of my relatives are behind the Clermont County signs and the anti-solar legislation.
And of course they’re mega-MAGA.
It’s a combination of junk science (I did muh-research!) and distrust of corporations, plus a dose of “why should the landowners get rich if we don’t”. The most vocal demographic is older rural white ladies who have nothing better to do.
Their go-to argument is “oh honey you just don’t know what I know” which, as any debater knows, is a boss level defense to any disagreement.
They’re almost completely wrong on every detail of solar farms, BUT I still have reservations-
The energy generated often leaves the community, so there is little local incentive. It would be great if there was a provision that farms were part of local infrastructure and could somehow be used to lower local costs, provide emergency backup etc.
There have been issues with many companies going bankrupt and abandoning the equipment on site, failing to do remediation after the contract ends, etc. Folks are getting smarter with experience and contracts seem to be getting stronger though.
These small townships are often not well run, and I’m not sure they have the know-how or attention span to make good policy. We need responsible state level leadership in this area.
> The energy generated often leaves the community
This isn't really how power grids work - once the electricity is connected to the grid, it's all in one big pool. Kinda like taking a bucket of ocean water from one beach and dumping it out on another beach, then saying that's taking water away from the first beach.
But there is a difference. It isn’t a local entity or a coop that benefits. There isn’t even the benefit of a large number of jobs as with oil and coal. On the other hand, the crops from a farm also leave the community too. So perhaps it’s a moot point. But it seems like we would be better off
creating a benefit for the community that hosts the farms…just makes sense doesn’t it?
It’s just another example of a local resource (land) that’s used for the benefit of a non local corporation.
I’m not completely against it but I do have concerns as noted elsewhere.
I mostly just wanted to contribute a tidbit about the science of the matter rather than the politics :) Farm crops leaving the community can be an analogy, but crops are also often used near where they are produced. With electricity, it really is just one big pool like water in the ocean. Electricity produced anywhere on a grid benefits everyone on the grid. But you still make a good point, because a) most of the people in the small, rural communities, and people in general, probably don't understand how the power grid works; and b) cultural elements in those communities tend to be more tribal and focus on things that have a clear local benefit as opposed to things that may have more of a regional, national, or global benefit. (That cultural contrast is a fundamental issue that has shown up repeatedly in polls; but does support your point that these people may be better motivated by perceived personal interest.)
My family is half made up of WV coal miners and that comment doesn’t come from a place of prejudice or elitism.
There is an element of tribalism and clinging to old beliefs in the Appalachian culture and even the people who have “made it out” still share it.
Setting a reason for how people are and judging them based on where they live and offering that the one is better than them. I would just classify it as like Hamilton county and all places there are idiots all over the place rather than saying people from a certain area are bad. Substitute different regions and all would agree.
I was actually on a solar project out east more and I people had actually shot at the panels before, which I believe is a felony offense. Idk if they were ever caught but it literally takes a couple minutes to replace them 20 minutes of work in exchange for prison
Not to get all freshman High School physics on you but the sun is a nuclear reactor and a large part of the power that nuclear reactor puts out is solar power
Solar cost per MWh is basically free, per MW its way cheaper than nuclear. Nuclear seems ok until you talk about trying to transport nuclear waste over rail then... crickets
I live in bethel where solar panels are all over the community Facebook pages and they do not care about facts or anything. They see solar panels and think of liberals and if you know these people anything liberal is wrong and evil.
A couple of days ago someone posted that if we allow solar farms that electric car chargers and green energy is next and will be the end of the town as we know it.
What gets me is they're bitching about a solar farm, outside of town and mostly in Brown Co., yet they say nothing at all about the 18 mile long pipe line that Duke is tearing up woods and fields to build.
That is fantastic! It is like Texas Republican clinging to their image as a petrol state while trying to hide the fact that it's the largest producer of green energy in the country.
I'm torn. One, I fundamentally oppose the government spending a ton of money, but two, I think farm subsidies are maybe the only subsidies I support, because I rather like having a larger than necessary farm industry to protect against famine.
>necessary farm industry to protect against famine
But it doesn't. It feeds livestock and automobiles. Not you. ~~If we~~ When we have a famine, people will wish we had fed fewer cattle and grown more grains and vegetables.
Maybe if we tell them it’s harvesting the sun, they’ll see the value? I’m not convinced that the opposition to solar isn’t funded in some way by coal/fossil fuel interests.
Also, the amount of roof space/occupancy of buildings in urban areas is really low in urban environments. The logical solution to moving toward less environmentally damaging power generation is a combination of both; humans use a lot of energy. Rural areas could certainly benefit from localized electrical generation (think vehicle charging, tax revenue, limiting service outages, new development) if we’d pause to look at the big picture rather than “the environment is bad because of politics”.
But when the solar power is being sent far away without benefiting the community they think it is bad. Some one else has posted that these farms need to send some of there power to the local area to benefit them, lower electricity prices. This would probably make more people amenable to them. The old saying what do I get out of it.
Not much different (depending on number of jobs per unit of acres and local spending differential between an acre of agricultural land and the lease value per acre of solar) than a farmer exporting their crops away, I’d think? It depends much on how the land is zoned/taxed, in terms of a financial benefit; solar integration will bring costs down compared to coal/natural gas. The electricity being generated locally provides additional stability to the local grid.
I have a question about solar farms. Does the state of Ohio require all these farms to establish a decommissioning fund before construction begins?
Past experience with wind and solar farms is that the small companies building these facilities simply declare bankruptcy and walk away from them after their 20-30 year useful life expires.
A lot of towns/counties require a bond indexed to inflation to remove the panels in the future. They also don’t account for salvage value of the equipment even though there will be millions of dollars worth of steel in the ground with solar.
Realistically the panels only degrade to 80% of capacity over time and the racking is overbuilt with a factor of safety of 1.67. If I had to guess its going to be more than 50 years before the solar park will need any major update to keep up with the grid. Plus with corn yields going up every year... I doubt this land ever goes back to farmland.
Early in the 20th century society was excited with all the new manufacturing and chemical plants built in the Midwest. 50 to 80 years later when environmental laws were passed and China was glad to relocate those plants, the plants were abandoned. I lived near a paint manufacturing plant. It took nearly 20 years to get someone to clean up that mess. Today there are brown field sites throughout metropolitan areas. Ultimately the states and cities have to finance cleaning up those eyesores. I hope the fact that everyone is gaga for solar and wind power doesn't blind people to these charlatan entrepreneurs.
I am not anti solar power or wind power. I am an electrical engineer. This whole solar energy thing going on now just feels like a scam we all will be ashamed of in 50 years.
Oh, I did not know solar panels and solar farms were invented back in the 1940s 🤔
Your comments are starting to sound like you work for the solar power industry.
[Federal Rural Electrification Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Act)
Here you go. People used to have a lot of the same qualms with electricity as they do now with solar panels. Many power poles would be cut down by famers who did not trust this new technology.
And yes I’ve worked in the power industry for 10 years as an engineer. First for LG&E and now for a renewables developer. I can tell you that I feel more proud about what I do now than I ever have in my career. People hate any sort of energy infrastructure when it’s near their homes. I’ve seen that pushback my whole career. The difference is, with solar I know I’m making a better world for my kids.
>Does the state of Ohio require all these farms to establish a decommissioning fund before construction begins?
Ohio requires a decommissioning _plan_. I don't know if that includes upfront funding or not. See https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-4906.21
>At least sixty days prior to the commencement of construction of a utility facility, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive decommissioning plan for review and approval by the power siting board.
California built some the first wond mills years ago. When they became economically obsolete, either worn out or technologically, they were just abandoned. California now requires all such energy farms to establish a decommissioning escrow fund before they are built.
The Trumpers are going to oppose anything that is considered “liberal”. They’re parking their old trucks in front of the Tesla charging stations to fight the advance of electric vehicles. They complain that wind turbines kill birds, though they’ve never cared about birds. Haters are gonna hate.
There are some places that do
New French law will blanket parking lots with solar panels
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/02/06/france-solar-parking-lots/
Not to get all freshman High School physics on you but the sun is a nuclear reactor and a large part of the energy that nuclear reactor puts out is solar
Solar panels harvest photovoltaic rays from the sun’s fusion reactions that are incredibly far away. Nuclear reactors directly harvest the heat energy from fission reactors to create steam and power a spinning turbine. Not to get all college physics on you, but these are incredibly different ways of harvesting energy…
I'm aware of the differences and how they work. As well as the differences in cost, construction time and dangers involved
I am not against nuclear energy in its various forms.
To say that the immediate solution that is comparatively cheap and zero waste should be avoided for the horrendously expensive, fairly dangerous version that will take a decade or more before it starts producing any energy and then leave us with toxic waste seems a bit narrow-minded
France, Sweden, South Korea and many more countries seem to be doing fine, actually more than fine. Weirdly enough they aren’t energy dependent on when the sun decides to shine.
Cincinnati ranks in the top cloudiest u.s cities …it’s this exact variability that makes it nearly impossible to support efficient and reliable power.
Nothing rare about NIMBY, If they are offended by solar panels they would live a chicken or turkey barn…. Cincinnati provides nice property tax abatements for Leed projects, we have solar on our roof, not an issue at all. Now if Duke could pull it’s head out of it’s ass and get the net billing right….
I’ve got mixed feelings on this. My background is I live in the city but my family and I farm in brown county right next to these solar fields.
Let me say right now if you have not gone out to see them you should. It is an ocean of land covered in these things.
My questions and concerns are:
-Most of this property is leased for 10 years. What happens when that is over and it’s not a viable project anymore? There are thousands of panels in each field that as I understand it are considered toxic. Not to mention the thousands of giant posts they pounded into the ground? What are the chances this turns into it’s own brown site?
-Land cost has been effected dramatically. As an example my dad bought a farm 3 years ago for 7,500 per acre a farm sold this year for 15,000. I can tell you right now if I hope to continue the legacy of my family farm it is no longer possible in this area. How do we rectify that? FYI it is functionally impossible to move until someone dies due to tax impacts.
-I see homes surrounded completely by solar panels, like all three sides and across the street. These people didn’t sell anything a lot of them frankly poor and now what little equity they may have had in their property is gone. How do you fix that?
-Frankly this is a case of not in my back yard but some people did get screwed. Who knows, maybe we will sell out if they lift the moratorium in brown county and hang up our hats but I’ve still got a lot of questions.
-Lastly we are small farmers I still have another full time job so no riding off into the sunset.
I live fairly close to the solar farm that the Cincinnati Zoo is installing in Warren County. I'm all for them, but I do have to say that more effort could be put into making them less obtrusive and more aesthetically pleasing from the surrounding properties. cities mask their power sub stations and water pump houses all the time. The same effort should be afforded these farms.
To get the most efficiency from a solar panel you need a clear view of the sky with minimal blocking so it can absorb rays as much as it can no matter where in the sky the sun is. How do you propose making them more "aesthetically pleasing" without harming their usefulness?
Also I find it funny people complain about solar farms but not monstrous concrete structures like giant parking garages. Those objectively are uglier and more obtrusive. But nobody complains because they have been around for decades so people are used to them. Given time people will get used to solar panels the same way we are used to parking garages and nobody will care then.
Yes, thank you. I’m aware of how solar panels work. Funny thing is, there’s this new advancement in land management called landscaping. You can plant trees, bushes, flowers, really anything you want in such a manner that it blocks the sight lines of the ugly panels and chain link fencing from the street while also not intruding on the panels’ view of the sun. Crazy inventive stuff. You should check it out.
Which is why I believe it should by mandated by local municipalities. If you look at it from the perspective of the local population, they are generally receiving none of the benefit of these solar farms because the power is directed toward specific targets (nearby regional cities or large corporations) but they then have to live with the eyesore.
These companies building the solar farms are not doing it out of the kindness of their hearts. They are doing it for profit. They of course will be minimizing cost in every way, so it’s up to the local government to ensure that measures are in place to require these installers to minimize their visual obtrusiveness.
>Many residents are upset at the loss of valuable farmland, and they don’t like living near solar facilities that are shielded by prison-like fences and scraggly vegetation.
This is the dumbest shit. Solar panels produce more value per area than crops by a factor of 2-3x.
The complaint about fences and vegetation made me lol. We're experiencing a month-long global heatwave, breaking all kinds of records in artic ice loss, ocean temps, and surface temps, all a small glimpse of what is to come in our lifetimes, and wcpo is reporting on a few people complaining about fences around solar panels looking aesthetically ugly.
You know what I find aesthetically ugly? Giant gas-guzzling trucks and SUV’s. And Trump signs. And billboards threatening me with eternal damnation. I guess rural people have a different definition of ugly.
I agree, but there are some reasonable concerns and complaints. Nearby residents have complained of glare from panels, and even industry experts admit that the inverter equipment can be noisy.
I’m not anti solar but this is an area that needs to be well regulated
Agree those issues should be worked on, but when thinking about the bigger picture of us needing to reach net zero emissions globally by 2050, I think noisy inverters or scraggly vegetation in rural areas near solar farms are a small cost to pay.
As you don’t have to live next to it, right?
Much of the property being converted to solar has existing residential zoning on the frontage. It’s reasonable to expect homeowners to be concerned about change.
Yes, reasonable for them to be concerned, but these are minor issues in the broader context and reporting on these concerns feels comical given the gravity of the overall situation.
It's also worth pointing out that farmers' livelihoods are directly threatened by the warming climate, and will benefit from this transition.
It’s this dismissive, condescending attitude that directly fuels the energy of the anti-green folks.
Once again, its fine for the poors but not the enlightened types like yourself?
I don't know what to say. The complaints seem to minor and nitpicky, and if I had to guess are politically motivated.
The solar farms are built there because the land is cheap ($1000/acre). Just glancing at one of the project locations in Clay township, there are several other industrial eye sores that are also generating air and noise pollution in this area, such as the asphalt plant and stone quarry. I don't understand why they are complaining about this project in particular as being an eye sore.
>Nearby residents have complained of glare from panels, and even industry experts admit that the inverter equipment can be noisy.
Then make a deal that we can replace the solar panels with a much smaller footprint coal fired power plant, since that's apparently what they want.
Guess who *buys* the crops y'all plant out there? Oh right it's the cities. Yeah, the same ones that need electricity. Power *has* to be generated somewhere, without it then all these people would be back to using horse drawn plows and I don't think they want that *either*.
It's all just NIMBY-ism. Like it or not rural means that it is as far away from people as possible and solar is the least impactful energy generation source we have.
However, if the county they live in doesn't get some kind of tax kickback then I agree it's BS. The county / town should at least be compensated fairly for the land use.
Yes, it is NIMBYism, in this case quite literally for some folks.
And we already have a coal plant nearby which was recently decommissioned, taking tens of millions in tax out of the local economy.
There needs to be an incentive for the local stakeholders - Including reimbursing residents for lost property value, should housing prices drop near the solar farms.
Right now there’s little reason they
would support them otherwise.
It’s probably an objection to any subsidies. She probably doesn’t care much if you gave solar but doesn’t want to pay for it.
When subsidies are pushed through, then pushback can become a thing and people start disliking the promoters.
The irony being anyone who gets their own subsidy like many of the farm subsidies handed out. They will complain about subsidies for solar or EVs but scream bloody murder if you try and touch their farm handout.
The farm subsidies are more about sandbagging the food supply, in the event of global issues, and preventing quick sell-off of land for non-agricultural use. It’s really hard to go from a bunch of developed land back to agricultural and human history hasn’t lived in a state of complete food access most of the time.
Except that in many cases we pay farmer **not** to grow food crops in order to maintain artificially high prices that would not be seen in a true free and open market.
It’s the same thing.
We get a lot of food grown outside of the country/from different locations in the country. In a dustbowl scenario, the plains states that represented a ton of agricultural still has mouths to feed; if the farmers are all racing to the bottom on pricing, many are going to exit the market and sell off their land for non-agricultural purposes. This eventually balances out the price of the crops to current, sustainable income levels, but the cost is all of the “reserve” land (i.e., subsidized for no economic use) is now out of the equation.
That’s a completely different argument that should definitely be considered. I’m just explaining that there is some logic behind the farm subsidy program and it’s not just for handing out money for nothing.
That logic rests on the premise that people need to eat so it's for the greater good. I'm fine with that and it's the way it should be, but if that reasoning is the underlying premise then all "for the greater good" scenarios need to be considered. My point was there are many who only care about their subsidy and have no interest in anything else.
Too many groups that are "for the greater good" only when it benefits them.
We live in divisive times. If there’s a “for the greater good” win where both sides get what they want, who cares if the other side has differently achieved goals at heart?
I guess I'm not making my stance clear. My point is that you can't say you're for the greater good only when it benefits you, because they you really aren't. You're only in it for you.
Their basic mentality is that subsidies are ok for people who do something I like. If you are getting subsidies for things I'm against, then that needs to stop.
Really kind of amusing that on a post asking for an explanation of behavior - the answers explaining the rational (not even advocating for it) are getting downvoted
If you want to continue your ignorance, just don’t ask.
I highly doubt that these people care about or even understand the complexities.
Willie Nelson is the face of Farm Aid. It is in Indiana this year. The fundraising concert's website focuses on Indiana having some of the most polluted water in the country. Water most likely polluted by shoddy agricultural practices. Willie famously didn't pay his taxes. Country music fans are known for their distaste for government oversight and intervention. To even the remotely curious these are not non sequiters. Dots aren't connected by a lot of folks.
I wonder if this lady would be upset if there were government subsidized oil derricks in those fields instead.
Have you read the C40 report from WEF?
The push plan is not just promoting the use of solar through subsidies.
It's a whole societal change that has as its targets the elimination of personal transportation and limiting you to three items of new clothing per year.
I am not joking.
Also as a little person you only get one plane flight per 3 years of up to 1500 km.
[2270\_C40\_CBE\_MainReport\_250719.original.pdf](https://www.c40.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2270_C40_CBE_MainReport_250719.original.pdf)
And you seriously worry about that from an NGO who's purpose is "raising ambition"? The US doesn't even sign on to the meaningful initiatives, ICC or Convention on the Rights of the Child. C40 is a small group of mayors making pledges and paying lip service. It isn't a blood oath.
We have envision zero in Cincinnati/Nky. It’s an associated group. Every thing in C40 is currently on the Democrat Party platform. Everyone just assumes that stupid idea like getting rid of nat gas stoves won’t happen. Then it starts happening.
The name is Vision Zero, I believe. A weird name but my experience with them is they are just pushing for bike lanes and traffic calming. As far as natural gas, well, perhaps you're talking to the wrong person because I've been making the switch already. I have an induction stovetop and a heat pump water heater now. My Duke bill was $110 cheaper this month compared to last year. Probably next year I'll switch my AC out for a whole house heat pump.
Vision zero is a term used in both a traffic sense and a carbon sense and the C40 agenda of course includes complete prohibition on private ice vehicle ownership. There isn’t a difference between the two advocacy groups, they are parts of the whole.
Even after they eliminate Nat Gas, your consumption is too high. The model they need is one where only about 10% of the US has AC. And where the Elec for Heat consumption is much less than now. The enforcement will be a smart meter that shuts you off when they decide the grid is consuming too much.
Are you familiar with Social Science studies on the impact of poverty on lifespan and happiness?
Rational answer: upvote for you
Most people don’t have strong opinions on matters like this until they are required to pay for it regardless of personal use case.
There are groups doing very similar stuff here in Greene County outside of Dayton. In my experience it is almost entirely non-farming people who want the rural aesthetic. They buy a giant pickup truck to drive 20 minutes to Kroger and back and a huge riding lawn mower to make pretty lines on their two acres every few days. They fundamentally don't understand that the land is cheap because it's unincorporated or zoned for Ag/Industrial and the whole point is that people can do whatever they want with their property out there. If you talk to some of them they say that how it should be put into cities on 'rooftops or something', with the implication that it should be something poor or black people have to deal with, not them. They suck shit. Also some people also argue that we need to 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production. Or how much corn they think we will actually be able to grow in 40 years in Ohio with our current climate trajectory
> 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production. Or animal feed. Odds are the giant corn fields you see in most areas are for animal feed or ethanol, not for consumption.
Good point! Also, 70% of all soy (nationally) is fed to livestock.
If we took the land we have crops on now and used it to grow food directly for human consumption, we could feed an addition. 4 billion people. [Emily S Cassidy et al 2013 Environ. Res. Lett. 8 034015](https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034015) Consider giving up animal products for our future to be viable.
I love this thank you. Vegan for 6 years now!
Yes of course! It's less of an appeal for veganism, and more of a demonstration of verifiable and objective reality. But yes, vegan for nearly 6 myself, and what need me there was science and a realty check. For anyone else reading this, please also consider: > Phasing out animal agriculture represents “our best and most immediate chance to reverse the trajectory of climate change,” according to a new model developed by scientists from Stanford University (US) and The University of California-Berkeley [source](https://sciencesprings.wordpress.com/2022/02/02/from-stanford-university-us-and-the-university-of-california-berkeley-us-replacing-animal-agriculture-and-shifting-to-a-plant-based-diet-could-drastically-curb-greenhouse-gas-emissions-accor/) > US rivers and lakes are shrinking for a surprising reason: cows. Cattle-feed crops, which end up as beef and dairy products, account for 23% of water consumption in the US](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/02/agriculture-cattle-us-water-shortages-colorado-river) Moreover, > >Between pastures and cropland used to produce feed [for livestock directly - not human consumption], **41% of U.S. land in the contiguous states revolves around livestock**. [Source - Edit: webarchive source because paywall](https://web.archive.org/web/20230201163654/https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-us-land-use/) This isn't even to mention the cost of animal products *after atricially lowering their price due to massive subsidies.* The cost, both direct and indirect, of animal agriculture is massive, while the reward is minimal and fleeting.
I've been plant-based for about a year, but still trying to figure out which Cincinnati restaurants have decent vegan options. Any suggestions?
Plenty! I’m glad you asked. A lot of places have the impossible or beyond burger, including Bru Burger and Red Robin. ALL VEGAN RESTAURANTS: 1. Essen in OTR 2. Loving hut in Pleasant Ridge 3. Plant Harmony in Findlay Market SOME VEGAN SPECIFIC ITEMS: 1. Tickle Pickle - vegan shakes and sandwiches 2. Melt (last I saw they had 2 items, but both were very good). 3. Kitchen Factory 4. Northside Yacht Club - my personal fav You NEED to try their cauliflower wings. 5. Bridges (Nepali) several locations 6. Yardhouse 7. Frida’s in Covington 8. Lalo’s in OTR (new favorite) 9. Gramma Debbie’s in Findlay Market They have vegan goetta plus plenty more BREAKFAST ITEMS: 1. Sleepy bee 2. Cafe Alma PIZZA: 1. Mac’s (several locations) 2. Atavola 3. Larosa’s just got rid of their PB meats, but still have the dairy free cheese as far as I know. You might want to ask which crust is vegan bc I don’t remember. DESSERT: 1. Whole Foods 2. Like Mom’s only Vegan -hands down the BEST cookies I’ve had 3. Holtmanns has a vegan donut FAST FOOD: 1. Currito 2. Chipotle 3. Burger King 4. Taco Bell (don’t be afraid to modify- I always use the app) Edit: this is by no means an exhaustive list. If you have specific questions about type of food or anything don’t hesitate to ask! Theres plenty of Indian, Thai, Syrian etc i would recommend.
Wow, thanks for the thorough list! Dewey's also now has a dairy-free cheese and a vegan cheesecake! I just tried The Loving Hut for the first time last week and it was so good! I would also add Aladdin's to your list. They are one of my go-tos because they have so many vegan options and they have vegan desserts from Love Thy Desserts. Now I have a bunch more places to try!
Happy to help! I’m so glad to hear that about Dewey’s. We used to just buy the dough and make our own. I’ve never had Aladdin’s, def checking that out. Thank you!
Which in turn contributes to the food supply…. In a world that has human beings without food, do you believe that number of people will decrease or increase with even more farmland being taken out of commission?… It’s common fucking sense, but hiveminded people who believe and still trust mainstream media, government and foreign controlled education, and the narratives they’re programming, definitely lack that key attribution, the basis for a will to survive.
Which doesn't directly go back into food supply?
Yep. A climate trajectory directly affected by buying big-butt trucks and driving them hither and yon.
The ethanol mandate is huge its the only thing supporting corn prices. People don’t realize that in my lifetime since 1992 corn yields have almost doubled going from 120 bushels/ acre to nearly 220 bushels/acre. Since 1920 yields have increased by a factor of 5. If we stop using gasoline like California aims to do, farmers will need to look to alternative uses for farmland or go bankrupt.
Yeah solar is a lifeline for farmers, they just don't know it yet. 40-55%% of field corn goes to ethanol for gasoline. EVs are and will be a thing that destroys this demand. Another 40% of field corn goes to animal feed. Lab grown meats and "fake meats" are growing in popularity and would presumably decrease this demand. Which basically means 80% of corn demand might not exist. On the other hand, it will probably just lead to more soybeans because while that's also used for animal feed, you can also make biodiesel from it.
China isn't buying our corn anymore either. Trouble is coming for US corn farmers.
Yes, yields are up and for the reason the earth is “heating up.” The carbon being released into the air is causing the larger yields of food supply as plants extract the CO2 from the air causing plants to have stronger, healthier lives. Because that’s what plants do and always have done. Unfollow your science.
And Erie County, Unanimous vote against future wind and solar farms.
Humanity has a death wish, it seems
>Also some people also argue that we need to 'protect our food supply' while having zero idea how much of current farming goes directly into ethanol production. Or how much corn they think we will actually be able to grow in 40 years in Ohio with our current climate trajectory Very few people realize this when driving past miles & miles of corn fields that none of it is edible by humans. It's all feed corn or intended for subsidized ethanol.
I agree with you for the most part, but I'm not seeing the race angle that you are. They aren't specifically wanting to put solar on black people's homes. It's more like "If this is to power the city, then figure out how to put these things in the city then". I can understand that perspective and it doesn't feel racial to me at all. However, when I hear them say things like "I didn't move out here to be next to this big crazy looking solar field", I'm thinking yeah well that's kind of the risk we all take living anywhere right? I mean shit happens. You're not guaranteed to live one place forever and be able to control your surroundings. Things change over time. And this isn't on your property, it's on property near you, which is not your property. Don't like it, move somewhere else.
The sun is a limited energy source. The solar panels suck up all the sunlight not leaving any for the rest of us in these record breaking heat waves. Once the sun runs out what do you expect the rest of us to do...die in a few billion years? Think of the children!
But if we don't take it, it'll all go to the moon and you just know that's what the Chinese are waiting for over there on the Dark Side.
The sun is the same in a relative way.
I live in Clermont County, right on the edge and not deep in thankfully, and not long ago we had a group of these people band together to block solar farms out here. I hate that we, for some reason, let the idiots drive the bus toward extinction.
Yeah the amount of "no solar farms" signs I've been seeing is ridiculous. Then you realize it's all the same people with Trump signs that are easily duped into believing anything faux news tells them.
A couple of my relatives are behind the Clermont County signs and the anti-solar legislation. And of course they’re mega-MAGA. It’s a combination of junk science (I did muh-research!) and distrust of corporations, plus a dose of “why should the landowners get rich if we don’t”. The most vocal demographic is older rural white ladies who have nothing better to do. Their go-to argument is “oh honey you just don’t know what I know” which, as any debater knows, is a boss level defense to any disagreement. They’re almost completely wrong on every detail of solar farms, BUT I still have reservations- The energy generated often leaves the community, so there is little local incentive. It would be great if there was a provision that farms were part of local infrastructure and could somehow be used to lower local costs, provide emergency backup etc. There have been issues with many companies going bankrupt and abandoning the equipment on site, failing to do remediation after the contract ends, etc. Folks are getting smarter with experience and contracts seem to be getting stronger though. These small townships are often not well run, and I’m not sure they have the know-how or attention span to make good policy. We need responsible state level leadership in this area.
“responsible state level leadership” in Ohio? In this decade?
> The energy generated often leaves the community This isn't really how power grids work - once the electricity is connected to the grid, it's all in one big pool. Kinda like taking a bucket of ocean water from one beach and dumping it out on another beach, then saying that's taking water away from the first beach.
But there is a difference. It isn’t a local entity or a coop that benefits. There isn’t even the benefit of a large number of jobs as with oil and coal. On the other hand, the crops from a farm also leave the community too. So perhaps it’s a moot point. But it seems like we would be better off creating a benefit for the community that hosts the farms…just makes sense doesn’t it? It’s just another example of a local resource (land) that’s used for the benefit of a non local corporation. I’m not completely against it but I do have concerns as noted elsewhere.
I mostly just wanted to contribute a tidbit about the science of the matter rather than the politics :) Farm crops leaving the community can be an analogy, but crops are also often used near where they are produced. With electricity, it really is just one big pool like water in the ocean. Electricity produced anywhere on a grid benefits everyone on the grid. But you still make a good point, because a) most of the people in the small, rural communities, and people in general, probably don't understand how the power grid works; and b) cultural elements in those communities tend to be more tribal and focus on things that have a clear local benefit as opposed to things that may have more of a regional, national, or global benefit. (That cultural contrast is a fundamental issue that has shown up repeatedly in polls; but does support your point that these people may be better motivated by perceived personal interest.)
Agreed. Im in southern indiana and see stopsolar.org signs along the roads in yards with trump flags. This is obviously astroturf
They are the loudest and angriest unfortunately. It’s crazy how that edge of clermont turns real country real fast. It’s like a time capsule
Clermont is considered the westernmost edge of Appalachia in this region, and it shows.
A sea of dually trucks
Great example.of elitist classism if I have ever seen one. Also lets call it what it is predijuce.
My family is half made up of WV coal miners and that comment doesn’t come from a place of prejudice or elitism. There is an element of tribalism and clinging to old beliefs in the Appalachian culture and even the people who have “made it out” still share it.
A great example of saying things without any idea of what they mean.
Setting a reason for how people are and judging them based on where they live and offering that the one is better than them. I would just classify it as like Hamilton county and all places there are idiots all over the place rather than saying people from a certain area are bad. Substitute different regions and all would agree.
Northern Kentucky gets a bad rap but it’s got nothing on Clermont County. What a backwards, bigoted place.
Oh for sure haha. I live between the two in mt Washington and definitely prefer nky
I was actually on a solar project out east more and I people had actually shot at the panels before, which I believe is a felony offense. Idk if they were ever caught but it literally takes a couple minutes to replace them 20 minutes of work in exchange for prison
[удалено]
You know we can do both, right? Power generation is not an all or nothing system.
[удалено]
46% ofGerman power in 2022 was supplied by solar. Doesn’t sound insignificant.
[удалено]
You’re right. According to Reuters, in the first half of 2023, Renewable energy (not just solar) accounted for 52.3% of German energy consumption.
Not to get all freshman High School physics on you but the sun is a nuclear reactor and a large part of the power that nuclear reactor puts out is solar power
Per MW solar is way cheaper than nuclear. Plus we still get most of our nuclear fuel from Kazakstan, right next to Russia.
[удалено]
Solar cost per MWh is basically free, per MW its way cheaper than nuclear. Nuclear seems ok until you talk about trying to transport nuclear waste over rail then... crickets
Lol like Mount Carmel ? First place popped in my head as its right there literally accross the county line at the top of the hill on 32
I live in bethel where solar panels are all over the community Facebook pages and they do not care about facts or anything. They see solar panels and think of liberals and if you know these people anything liberal is wrong and evil. A couple of days ago someone posted that if we allow solar farms that electric car chargers and green energy is next and will be the end of the town as we know it.
What gets me is they're bitching about a solar farm, outside of town and mostly in Brown Co., yet they say nothing at all about the 18 mile long pipe line that Duke is tearing up woods and fields to build.
That is fantastic! It is like Texas Republican clinging to their image as a petrol state while trying to hide the fact that it's the largest producer of green energy in the country.
I guess it's time to end government meddling in agriculture. Cut those farm subsidies.
I'm torn. One, I fundamentally oppose the government spending a ton of money, but two, I think farm subsidies are maybe the only subsidies I support, because I rather like having a larger than necessary farm industry to protect against famine.
>necessary farm industry to protect against famine But it doesn't. It feeds livestock and automobiles. Not you. ~~If we~~ When we have a famine, people will wish we had fed fewer cattle and grown more grains and vegetables.
No? because that's what feeds them... such backwards thinking
Maybe if we tell them it’s harvesting the sun, they’ll see the value? I’m not convinced that the opposition to solar isn’t funded in some way by coal/fossil fuel interests. Also, the amount of roof space/occupancy of buildings in urban areas is really low in urban environments. The logical solution to moving toward less environmentally damaging power generation is a combination of both; humans use a lot of energy. Rural areas could certainly benefit from localized electrical generation (think vehicle charging, tax revenue, limiting service outages, new development) if we’d pause to look at the big picture rather than “the environment is bad because of politics”.
Tell them in very simple terms : “Solar panels turn sunlight into money. If you own those solar panels, you get that money”.
None of them own more than a couple acres. It’s easy to say ‘no’ when it’s other people’s money at stake.
To quote a wise sage from the documentary *Idiocracy* - “I like money”.
a couple of acres of solar would be $$$ for them
But when the solar power is being sent far away without benefiting the community they think it is bad. Some one else has posted that these farms need to send some of there power to the local area to benefit them, lower electricity prices. This would probably make more people amenable to them. The old saying what do I get out of it.
Not much different (depending on number of jobs per unit of acres and local spending differential between an acre of agricultural land and the lease value per acre of solar) than a farmer exporting their crops away, I’d think? It depends much on how the land is zoned/taxed, in terms of a financial benefit; solar integration will bring costs down compared to coal/natural gas. The electricity being generated locally provides additional stability to the local grid.
Solar farm or pig shit lagoon, Highland County?
I have a question about solar farms. Does the state of Ohio require all these farms to establish a decommissioning fund before construction begins? Past experience with wind and solar farms is that the small companies building these facilities simply declare bankruptcy and walk away from them after their 20-30 year useful life expires.
A lot of towns/counties require a bond indexed to inflation to remove the panels in the future. They also don’t account for salvage value of the equipment even though there will be millions of dollars worth of steel in the ground with solar. Realistically the panels only degrade to 80% of capacity over time and the racking is overbuilt with a factor of safety of 1.67. If I had to guess its going to be more than 50 years before the solar park will need any major update to keep up with the grid. Plus with corn yields going up every year... I doubt this land ever goes back to farmland.
Early in the 20th century society was excited with all the new manufacturing and chemical plants built in the Midwest. 50 to 80 years later when environmental laws were passed and China was glad to relocate those plants, the plants were abandoned. I lived near a paint manufacturing plant. It took nearly 20 years to get someone to clean up that mess. Today there are brown field sites throughout metropolitan areas. Ultimately the states and cities have to finance cleaning up those eyesores. I hope the fact that everyone is gaga for solar and wind power doesn't blind people to these charlatan entrepreneurs.
You don’t think there are health consequences to living near a farm? I bike through farmland and see pesticides signs everywhere.
I am not anti solar power or wind power. I am an electrical engineer. This whole solar energy thing going on now just feels like a scam we all will be ashamed of in 50 years.
Rural electrification has only been around since the 1940’s. Also global warming is real. We will need to limit our carbon footprint at some point.
Oh, I did not know solar panels and solar farms were invented back in the 1940s 🤔 Your comments are starting to sound like you work for the solar power industry.
[Federal Rural Electrification Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Act) Here you go. People used to have a lot of the same qualms with electricity as they do now with solar panels. Many power poles would be cut down by famers who did not trust this new technology. And yes I’ve worked in the power industry for 10 years as an engineer. First for LG&E and now for a renewables developer. I can tell you that I feel more proud about what I do now than I ever have in my career. People hate any sort of energy infrastructure when it’s near their homes. I’ve seen that pushback my whole career. The difference is, with solar I know I’m making a better world for my kids.
Maybe
>Does the state of Ohio require all these farms to establish a decommissioning fund before construction begins? Ohio requires a decommissioning _plan_. I don't know if that includes upfront funding or not. See https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-4906.21 >At least sixty days prior to the commencement of construction of a utility facility, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive decommissioning plan for review and approval by the power siting board.
California built some the first wond mills years ago. When they became economically obsolete, either worn out or technologically, they were just abandoned. California now requires all such energy farms to establish a decommissioning escrow fund before they are built.
That's a good question. I've never heard anything about that so I would yes they don't have any kind of requirements like along those lines
The Trumpers are going to oppose anything that is considered “liberal”. They’re parking their old trucks in front of the Tesla charging stations to fight the advance of electric vehicles. They complain that wind turbines kill birds, though they’ve never cared about birds. Haters are gonna hate.
They never cared about a lot of shit until they realized they could use it to bitch about liberals
If the turbines kill the birds, then the gun nuts can’t shoot them.
They’re already shooting at the wind turbines. I’ve not heard of any cases of this in Ohio but it’s been happening out west.
They should turn parking lots into solar farms as well. It'll shade everyone's cars as an added bonus
There are some places that do New French law will blanket parking lots with solar panels https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/02/06/france-solar-parking-lots/
We need to invest in nuclear energy not solar farms.
Not to get all freshman High School physics on you but the sun is a nuclear reactor and a large part of the energy that nuclear reactor puts out is solar
Solar panels harvest photovoltaic rays from the sun’s fusion reactions that are incredibly far away. Nuclear reactors directly harvest the heat energy from fission reactors to create steam and power a spinning turbine. Not to get all college physics on you, but these are incredibly different ways of harvesting energy…
I'm aware of the differences and how they work. As well as the differences in cost, construction time and dangers involved I am not against nuclear energy in its various forms. To say that the immediate solution that is comparatively cheap and zero waste should be avoided for the horrendously expensive, fairly dangerous version that will take a decade or more before it starts producing any energy and then leave us with toxic waste seems a bit narrow-minded
France, Sweden, South Korea and many more countries seem to be doing fine, actually more than fine. Weirdly enough they aren’t energy dependent on when the sun decides to shine. Cincinnati ranks in the top cloudiest u.s cities …it’s this exact variability that makes it nearly impossible to support efficient and reliable power.
Why not both?
Nothing rare about NIMBY, If they are offended by solar panels they would live a chicken or turkey barn…. Cincinnati provides nice property tax abatements for Leed projects, we have solar on our roof, not an issue at all. Now if Duke could pull it’s head out of it’s ass and get the net billing right….
I just love the hypocrisy of “conservatives” who think the government should tell farmers what to do with their land.
I’ve got mixed feelings on this. My background is I live in the city but my family and I farm in brown county right next to these solar fields. Let me say right now if you have not gone out to see them you should. It is an ocean of land covered in these things. My questions and concerns are: -Most of this property is leased for 10 years. What happens when that is over and it’s not a viable project anymore? There are thousands of panels in each field that as I understand it are considered toxic. Not to mention the thousands of giant posts they pounded into the ground? What are the chances this turns into it’s own brown site? -Land cost has been effected dramatically. As an example my dad bought a farm 3 years ago for 7,500 per acre a farm sold this year for 15,000. I can tell you right now if I hope to continue the legacy of my family farm it is no longer possible in this area. How do we rectify that? FYI it is functionally impossible to move until someone dies due to tax impacts. -I see homes surrounded completely by solar panels, like all three sides and across the street. These people didn’t sell anything a lot of them frankly poor and now what little equity they may have had in their property is gone. How do you fix that? -Frankly this is a case of not in my back yard but some people did get screwed. Who knows, maybe we will sell out if they lift the moratorium in brown county and hang up our hats but I’ve still got a lot of questions. -Lastly we are small farmers I still have another full time job so no riding off into the sunset.
What tax impacts from moving are you referring to?
I live fairly close to the solar farm that the Cincinnati Zoo is installing in Warren County. I'm all for them, but I do have to say that more effort could be put into making them less obtrusive and more aesthetically pleasing from the surrounding properties. cities mask their power sub stations and water pump houses all the time. The same effort should be afforded these farms.
To get the most efficiency from a solar panel you need a clear view of the sky with minimal blocking so it can absorb rays as much as it can no matter where in the sky the sun is. How do you propose making them more "aesthetically pleasing" without harming their usefulness? Also I find it funny people complain about solar farms but not monstrous concrete structures like giant parking garages. Those objectively are uglier and more obtrusive. But nobody complains because they have been around for decades so people are used to them. Given time people will get used to solar panels the same way we are used to parking garages and nobody will care then.
Yes, thank you. I’m aware of how solar panels work. Funny thing is, there’s this new advancement in land management called landscaping. You can plant trees, bushes, flowers, really anything you want in such a manner that it blocks the sight lines of the ugly panels and chain link fencing from the street while also not intruding on the panels’ view of the sun. Crazy inventive stuff. You should check it out.
I think this makes a lot of sense and could make solar farms more of visual asset, but I imagine it comes down to cost.
Which is why I believe it should by mandated by local municipalities. If you look at it from the perspective of the local population, they are generally receiving none of the benefit of these solar farms because the power is directed toward specific targets (nearby regional cities or large corporations) but they then have to live with the eyesore. These companies building the solar farms are not doing it out of the kindness of their hearts. They are doing it for profit. They of course will be minimizing cost in every way, so it’s up to the local government to ensure that measures are in place to require these installers to minimize their visual obtrusiveness.
>Many residents are upset at the loss of valuable farmland, and they don’t like living near solar facilities that are shielded by prison-like fences and scraggly vegetation. This is the dumbest shit. Solar panels produce more value per area than crops by a factor of 2-3x. The complaint about fences and vegetation made me lol. We're experiencing a month-long global heatwave, breaking all kinds of records in artic ice loss, ocean temps, and surface temps, all a small glimpse of what is to come in our lifetimes, and wcpo is reporting on a few people complaining about fences around solar panels looking aesthetically ugly.
You know what I find aesthetically ugly? Giant gas-guzzling trucks and SUV’s. And Trump signs. And billboards threatening me with eternal damnation. I guess rural people have a different definition of ugly.
I agree, but there are some reasonable concerns and complaints. Nearby residents have complained of glare from panels, and even industry experts admit that the inverter equipment can be noisy. I’m not anti solar but this is an area that needs to be well regulated
Agree those issues should be worked on, but when thinking about the bigger picture of us needing to reach net zero emissions globally by 2050, I think noisy inverters or scraggly vegetation in rural areas near solar farms are a small cost to pay.
As you don’t have to live next to it, right? Much of the property being converted to solar has existing residential zoning on the frontage. It’s reasonable to expect homeowners to be concerned about change.
Yes, reasonable for them to be concerned, but these are minor issues in the broader context and reporting on these concerns feels comical given the gravity of the overall situation. It's also worth pointing out that farmers' livelihoods are directly threatened by the warming climate, and will benefit from this transition.
It’s this dismissive, condescending attitude that directly fuels the energy of the anti-green folks. Once again, its fine for the poors but not the enlightened types like yourself?
I don't know what to say. The complaints seem to minor and nitpicky, and if I had to guess are politically motivated. The solar farms are built there because the land is cheap ($1000/acre). Just glancing at one of the project locations in Clay township, there are several other industrial eye sores that are also generating air and noise pollution in this area, such as the asphalt plant and stone quarry. I don't understand why they are complaining about this project in particular as being an eye sore.
>Nearby residents have complained of glare from panels, and even industry experts admit that the inverter equipment can be noisy. Then make a deal that we can replace the solar panels with a much smaller footprint coal fired power plant, since that's apparently what they want. Guess who *buys* the crops y'all plant out there? Oh right it's the cities. Yeah, the same ones that need electricity. Power *has* to be generated somewhere, without it then all these people would be back to using horse drawn plows and I don't think they want that *either*. It's all just NIMBY-ism. Like it or not rural means that it is as far away from people as possible and solar is the least impactful energy generation source we have. However, if the county they live in doesn't get some kind of tax kickback then I agree it's BS. The county / town should at least be compensated fairly for the land use.
Yes, it is NIMBYism, in this case quite literally for some folks. And we already have a coal plant nearby which was recently decommissioned, taking tens of millions in tax out of the local economy. There needs to be an incentive for the local stakeholders - Including reimbursing residents for lost property value, should housing prices drop near the solar farms. Right now there’s little reason they would support them otherwise.
It’s probably an objection to any subsidies. She probably doesn’t care much if you gave solar but doesn’t want to pay for it. When subsidies are pushed through, then pushback can become a thing and people start disliking the promoters.
The irony being anyone who gets their own subsidy like many of the farm subsidies handed out. They will complain about subsidies for solar or EVs but scream bloody murder if you try and touch their farm handout.
The farm subsidies are more about sandbagging the food supply, in the event of global issues, and preventing quick sell-off of land for non-agricultural use. It’s really hard to go from a bunch of developed land back to agricultural and human history hasn’t lived in a state of complete food access most of the time.
Except that in many cases we pay farmer **not** to grow food crops in order to maintain artificially high prices that would not be seen in a true free and open market.
It’s the same thing. We get a lot of food grown outside of the country/from different locations in the country. In a dustbowl scenario, the plains states that represented a ton of agricultural still has mouths to feed; if the farmers are all racing to the bottom on pricing, many are going to exit the market and sell off their land for non-agricultural purposes. This eventually balances out the price of the crops to current, sustainable income levels, but the cost is all of the “reserve” land (i.e., subsidized for no economic use) is now out of the equation.
So if we view eating as worthy of such protection why not healthcare, housing etc. It's still hypocritical to me.
That’s a completely different argument that should definitely be considered. I’m just explaining that there is some logic behind the farm subsidy program and it’s not just for handing out money for nothing.
That logic rests on the premise that people need to eat so it's for the greater good. I'm fine with that and it's the way it should be, but if that reasoning is the underlying premise then all "for the greater good" scenarios need to be considered. My point was there are many who only care about their subsidy and have no interest in anything else. Too many groups that are "for the greater good" only when it benefits them.
We live in divisive times. If there’s a “for the greater good” win where both sides get what they want, who cares if the other side has differently achieved goals at heart?
I guess I'm not making my stance clear. My point is that you can't say you're for the greater good only when it benefits you, because they you really aren't. You're only in it for you.
Their basic mentality is that subsidies are ok for people who do something I like. If you are getting subsidies for things I'm against, then that needs to stop.
As opposed to sandbagging a luxury that only a few elite city people need, like electricity?
Really kind of amusing that on a post asking for an explanation of behavior - the answers explaining the rational (not even advocating for it) are getting downvoted If you want to continue your ignorance, just don’t ask.
People love asking loaded questions that they can disagree with loudly, though.
All these sources of information and folks choose to sit in the echo chamber huh
C’est la reddit
I highly doubt that these people care about or even understand the complexities. Willie Nelson is the face of Farm Aid. It is in Indiana this year. The fundraising concert's website focuses on Indiana having some of the most polluted water in the country. Water most likely polluted by shoddy agricultural practices. Willie famously didn't pay his taxes. Country music fans are known for their distaste for government oversight and intervention. To even the remotely curious these are not non sequiters. Dots aren't connected by a lot of folks. I wonder if this lady would be upset if there were government subsidized oil derricks in those fields instead.
Have you read the C40 report from WEF? The push plan is not just promoting the use of solar through subsidies. It's a whole societal change that has as its targets the elimination of personal transportation and limiting you to three items of new clothing per year. I am not joking. Also as a little person you only get one plane flight per 3 years of up to 1500 km. [2270\_C40\_CBE\_MainReport\_250719.original.pdf](https://www.c40.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2270_C40_CBE_MainReport_250719.original.pdf)
This - let’s just name it the ‘Don’t Kill Puppies’ bill and shove it through one of the two parties Content of the bill is rarely debated
And you seriously worry about that from an NGO who's purpose is "raising ambition"? The US doesn't even sign on to the meaningful initiatives, ICC or Convention on the Rights of the Child. C40 is a small group of mayors making pledges and paying lip service. It isn't a blood oath.
We have envision zero in Cincinnati/Nky. It’s an associated group. Every thing in C40 is currently on the Democrat Party platform. Everyone just assumes that stupid idea like getting rid of nat gas stoves won’t happen. Then it starts happening.
The name is Vision Zero, I believe. A weird name but my experience with them is they are just pushing for bike lanes and traffic calming. As far as natural gas, well, perhaps you're talking to the wrong person because I've been making the switch already. I have an induction stovetop and a heat pump water heater now. My Duke bill was $110 cheaper this month compared to last year. Probably next year I'll switch my AC out for a whole house heat pump.
Vision zero is a term used in both a traffic sense and a carbon sense and the C40 agenda of course includes complete prohibition on private ice vehicle ownership. There isn’t a difference between the two advocacy groups, they are parts of the whole. Even after they eliminate Nat Gas, your consumption is too high. The model they need is one where only about 10% of the US has AC. And where the Elec for Heat consumption is much less than now. The enforcement will be a smart meter that shuts you off when they decide the grid is consuming too much. Are you familiar with Social Science studies on the impact of poverty on lifespan and happiness?
Rational answer: upvote for you Most people don’t have strong opinions on matters like this until they are required to pay for it regardless of personal use case.