Major solar project in works north of Ainsworth

AINSWORTH — A 2,000-acre, 200 MW solar energy project is in the works on Washington County farmland northwest of Ainsworth. The venture — called the Goldfinch Solar Project — is owned by Bechtel Corporation, and being developed by Conifer Power Company.

Information on Bechtel’s website says the facility would provide enough energy to power 33,000 homes at its expected start of commercial operations in 2025.

Conifer Power Vice President of Development Tom Swierczewski said the panels would go on a contiguous area of leased land current used for row crops, with most of the needed agreements already signed.

“We really think that this represents the best possible circumstance for both the project company and for our land owners,” he said. “It remains in family ownership … when the need for the solar facility is over, they’ll still own the property, or the next generations of their family will, and it certainly is possible they could put that back into a row-crop, agricultural use.”

While utility-scale solar operations are a new technology with little life span data, Swierczewski said the project was expected to continue operations for around 40 years after construction ends.

“We really encourage our land owners to be thinking about this from a generational perspective,” he said. “Once construction starts it’s called an operating term, and that term lasts for several decades, 30-50 years.”

Swierczewski said the companies chose Washington County for its flat, available land, that land’s proximity to a transmission substation, a lack of restrictions, and demand.

Though the county does not have an ordinance governing the renewable energy’s production, the sheer size of facilities makes them subject to a range of state and federal codes, administered by the Iowa Utilities Board. Swierczewski said the companies were undergoing reviews to ensure development wouldn’t put local wildlife at risk.

“We’re making sure that we have a project that’s permitable, so we aren’t harming threatened and endangered species,” he said. “We’re in the process of going through all those studies now. We’re confident that the project is well-cited, but we won’t know for sure for a while … we think we have all of the key ingredients at this site.”

Swierczewski said developers had not yet committed to a utility company buyer for the energy it produces. While that may seem counterintuitive, he said it was par for the course in the green energy industry.

“It is a little bit of the cart before the horse,” he said. “It is a somewhat risky business. We have to basically or nearly fully develop these projects before we can even market them … and the risk is on us.”

If the project is cleared by the state’s utility board, constructed, and taken up by a power company, Swierczewski said it would greatly impact the local economy. While he cited an internal report, he said the full findings were not yet available to the public.

“Solar projects are economic engines for local economies,” he said. “(The) report estimates that the Goldfinch Solar Project, over its life is going to add somewhere around $10 million of new taxing revenue to all the taxing bodies of Washington County … this project is going to pay millions of dollars in rent to our land owners, it’s going to create hundreds of construction jobs.”

While the state offers a variety of tax exemptions for renewable energy projects, most may not be available for Goldfinch once it’s built.

“Although state renewable energy tax credits are still available, their applicability to solar farms exist almost exclusively for the investment and sale of equipment upon installation,” a legal representative for Bechtel said in an email to the Washington County assessor’s office dated to October, 2021.

The taxes that are paid would come in over the course of several years, according to another email to several county officials from a Conifer Power representative.

“Washington County is estimated to receive approximately $270,000 per year under the generation tax paid from the project,” said that email, sent in February or 2022. “The remaining tax, which is a delivery tax, is either paid by the project or, if delivered to an Iowa utility, paid by the utility. This tax is distributed across the service territory that power is delivered to.”

“A Washington County Solar Project will be able to take advantage of various tax credits relating to the investment and installation,” the email said. “In purchasing equipment, a Washington County Solar Project will avoid paying sales tax using (an) exemption for the purchase of solar energy systems.”

Solar energy has a rocky history in the state. While the Linn County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval for one solar farm on Thursday, it recommended denial for another in November. That second project is delayed at the moment as vocal opponents in the community called for a court review.

Some in Iowa have voiced opposition to the projects, saying they would trade off with the state’s food production. One bill, proposed but not passed by the state Senate last legislative session, aimed to limit the quality of farmland on which solar panels could be built.

Sara Alden, a spokesperson for advocacy group Iowa For Responsible Solar, said utility-scale solar power was not a good option for agricultural communities like Washington County.

“Iowa is blessed with arable land,” she said. “There are many, many places in the world where you cannot grow food … That is who Iowa is, we are a farming community and culture. And we do not believe that utility-scale solar has a place on farm fields.”

That trade off is a contentious point, however. A reference document by the Center for Rural Affairs and Iowa Environmental Council for counties considering solar ordinances, downplayed the concern.

“To produce 10 percent of Iowa’s electricity from solar energy, 13,440 acres would need to be occupied by solar arrays, or just 0.04 percent of all of Iowa’s farmland,” it said. “Once a system has been decommissioned and removed, farmland can be returned to an agricultural use … We do not recommend any provisions that prohibit solar as a use on prime farmland.”

Still, Alden said the disruption to crop output was a greater risk to more sectors of the economy than potential benefits from solar energy.

“If farmland is doing a great job growing food … the resource of corn and the resource of soybeans go so much further,” she said. “It can be used for fuel or manufacturing, it has more than one purpose, whereas if you’re covering these farm fields with solar panels, that’s it. You are sacrificing the productivity and the quality and the gift of agricultural soil.”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com