Ohio solar energy project with sheep farming scrapped due to opposition
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A solar energy project near Indian Lake that promised to combine photovoltaic panels with sheep farming, known as lambscaping or agrivoltaics, is no longer going forward.
According to a news release, Open Road Renewables' Grange Solar Grazing Center has withdrawn its application for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need from the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB).
How dismantling the Department of Education will affect Ohio schools
Doug Herling, Vice President of Open Road Renewables, stated that the decision to withdraw was difficult, noting that the project was thoughtfully designed to balance environmental protection, agriculture, tourism and economic benefits for the community.
'All legitimate concerns about the project were addressed and the benefits would have been spread far and wide,' Herling said. 'Unfortunately, some community members were swayed by fears that were entirely unfounded.'
On a website for the solar opposition organization, Indian Lake Advocacy Group, objections to the project included concerns about protecting and preserving wildlife, tourism, farmland, and historical landmarks.
'The disruption caused by years of construction, along with the loss of open landscapes and natural views, will diminish Indian Lake's appeal to boaters, anglers, campers, and tourists,' the group offered in a prewritten letter for supporters to send to the OSPB. 'Many businesses rely on tourism to survive, and a project of this scale threatens to drive visitors elsewhere, resulting in economic harm to our community.'
The solar rival group also focused on infrastructure details and possible future owners of the agrivoltaic operation on its website to sway opinion against the project.
'What is the solar project? 2,600 acres full of 15 feet tall solar panels, inverters, driveways, racking poles, cables, and 7 feet tall fencing,' Indian Lake Advocacy Group posted on its site. 'Over 4,000 acres have been leased, so there is a potential for more if they get the necessary easements. This project … is being developed by Open Road Renewables, LLC out of Texas. They are just the developer and in most cases will sell to another company (often foreign-owned) before construction even starts.'
Ohio reports first measles case of 2025
Criticizing the approval process, Herling stated that while the OPSB staff thoroughly vetted the project's plans, equivalent scrutiny of the opposition's claims did not exist.
'There is no such fact-checking of the onslaught of anti-solar propaganda, which caused local officials to make statements against solar,' said Herling. 'OPSB staff relied on those stated positions to declare the project not in the public interest, despite all of its benefits.'
Wrapping up his statement, Herling thanked those who supported the project and reiterated the company's belief in the long-term benefits of renewable energy for the state's economy, environment, and communities.
'Opportunities like the Grange Solar Grazing Center do not come along often,' Herling said. 'The project would have brought jobs, wages, and millions of dollars in annual tax revenue to fund local schools and county and township services.
'The agrivoltaics plan would have created a new generation of sheep farmers. The drain tile plan would have improved drainage in the area. The vegetation management plan would have supported biodiversity, improved water quality, and reduced run-off. We wish all of these benefits could have come to fruition.'
Herling told NBC4 that Open Road Renewables has two other agrivoltaic projects in Ohio. Frasier Solar is in Knox County and is awaiting a decision from the OPSB and Crossroads Solar, in Morrow County, is preparing to submit an application to the OPSB.
How grocery stores are combatting SNAP benefit thefts in Ohio
Additionally, Herling said the majority of farmers and landowners who signed on to partner with the project plan to continue farming.
'Others may develop the land into housing, mining, livestock facilities, or seek out other forms of electricity generation development such as nuclear or energy storage,' Herling said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Yahoo
Ohio solar energy project with sheep farming scrapped due to opposition
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A solar energy project near Indian Lake that promised to combine photovoltaic panels with sheep farming, known as lambscaping or agrivoltaics, is no longer going forward. According to a news release, Open Road Renewables' Grange Solar Grazing Center has withdrawn its application for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need from the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB). How dismantling the Department of Education will affect Ohio schools Doug Herling, Vice President of Open Road Renewables, stated that the decision to withdraw was difficult, noting that the project was thoughtfully designed to balance environmental protection, agriculture, tourism and economic benefits for the community. 'All legitimate concerns about the project were addressed and the benefits would have been spread far and wide,' Herling said. 'Unfortunately, some community members were swayed by fears that were entirely unfounded.' On a website for the solar opposition organization, Indian Lake Advocacy Group, objections to the project included concerns about protecting and preserving wildlife, tourism, farmland, and historical landmarks. 'The disruption caused by years of construction, along with the loss of open landscapes and natural views, will diminish Indian Lake's appeal to boaters, anglers, campers, and tourists,' the group offered in a prewritten letter for supporters to send to the OSPB. 'Many businesses rely on tourism to survive, and a project of this scale threatens to drive visitors elsewhere, resulting in economic harm to our community.' The solar rival group also focused on infrastructure details and possible future owners of the agrivoltaic operation on its website to sway opinion against the project. 'What is the solar project? 2,600 acres full of 15 feet tall solar panels, inverters, driveways, racking poles, cables, and 7 feet tall fencing,' Indian Lake Advocacy Group posted on its site. 'Over 4,000 acres have been leased, so there is a potential for more if they get the necessary easements. This project … is being developed by Open Road Renewables, LLC out of Texas. They are just the developer and in most cases will sell to another company (often foreign-owned) before construction even starts.' Ohio reports first measles case of 2025 Criticizing the approval process, Herling stated that while the OPSB staff thoroughly vetted the project's plans, equivalent scrutiny of the opposition's claims did not exist. 'There is no such fact-checking of the onslaught of anti-solar propaganda, which caused local officials to make statements against solar,' said Herling. 'OPSB staff relied on those stated positions to declare the project not in the public interest, despite all of its benefits.' Wrapping up his statement, Herling thanked those who supported the project and reiterated the company's belief in the long-term benefits of renewable energy for the state's economy, environment, and communities. 'Opportunities like the Grange Solar Grazing Center do not come along often,' Herling said. 'The project would have brought jobs, wages, and millions of dollars in annual tax revenue to fund local schools and county and township services. 'The agrivoltaics plan would have created a new generation of sheep farmers. The drain tile plan would have improved drainage in the area. The vegetation management plan would have supported biodiversity, improved water quality, and reduced run-off. We wish all of these benefits could have come to fruition.' Herling told NBC4 that Open Road Renewables has two other agrivoltaic projects in Ohio. Frasier Solar is in Knox County and is awaiting a decision from the OPSB and Crossroads Solar, in Morrow County, is preparing to submit an application to the OPSB. How grocery stores are combatting SNAP benefit thefts in Ohio Additionally, Herling said the majority of farmers and landowners who signed on to partner with the project plan to continue farming. 'Others may develop the land into housing, mining, livestock facilities, or seek out other forms of electricity generation development such as nuclear or energy storage,' Herling said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Yahoo
The good, the bad, and the ugly on Ohio's long overdue energy legislation
An electricity meter. (Stock photo from Getty Images.) This year, new legislation in the Ohio Statehouse could finally see the end to some of the worst aspects of 2019's House Bill 6 — which David Roberts of Vox called 'the worst energy bill of the 21st century.' That is great news — but it would come at a high cost. Instead of bailing out coal and nuclear plants, Ohioans could find themselves living next to large gas plants, pushed through a fast-track approval process without local approval, supplied with gas from fracking our parks. Read on to learn the good, the bad, and the ugly about Ohio Senate Bill 2 and Ohio House Bill 15. Among the good things SB 2 and HB 15 would do is phase out the bailouts of two Ohio Valley Electric Coalition (OVEC) coal plants jointly owned by several Ohio utilities – one of which is in Indiana. Ohioans have paid upward of $670 million in coal bailouts since HB 6. The coal bailouts would end at the expiration of each utility's 'electric security plan' — plans that allow utilities to attach extra charges, or 'riders,' to customer bills — over the next five years. Then the electric security plans themselves would also be eliminated. Instead, utilities would have to work with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to set a standard service offer – the going rate for electricity – based only on markets, without extra riders or fees. Utilities would have to work with PUCO annually to ensure the rate is in line with changing market conditions. Some other good things in the current version of these two bills include: A community energy pilot program in HB 15 that would allow small scale energy projects – 10 MW or 20 MW – to be built on distressed land that people could subscribe to for their electricity use. An energy efficiency loan program for schools in SB 2 – a good program that should also include loans for solar panels, which it originally had. If that's where SB 2 and HB 15 stopped, there would be plenty to support. However, both bills also contain some terrible provisions that should be changed or removed for the sake of Ohio's communities and our environment. These provisions revolve around an accelerated review process at the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB), which approves the siting of major energy facilities such as large electric generation plants, transmission lines, and pipelines. The current OPSB process takes months and sometimes years. It involves public information sessions, applications that run thousands of pages, public hearings, months of written public comments, an agency investigation, and an adjudicatory hearing to establish the facts. SB 2 would shorten this process to just 120 days – four months. Even worse, both bills would shorten the process to only 45 days – just six weeks – for two types of applications: An electric generation plant, electric transmission line, or gas pipeline in a Priority Investment Area A major utility facility – defined as 50 MW or more – on property owned by the applicant. In the first case, local governments would nominate brownfields or former coal mines in their communities to be Priority Investment Areas — so at least there would be local buy-in. In the second case, there is no local involvement. The only party that identifies the location for a 50 MW or larger energy generation plant is the 'applicant' who owns the property. Nothing in either bill specifies who the applicant could be — but presumably a large energy user such as a data center. Data centers are what is driving this. These large buildings house rows and rows of computer servers that must be kept running and kept cool. Each data center uses hundreds of megawatts of electricity — equal to a small city — to power things like cloud computing, AI, or cryptocurrency. There are 176 data centers in Ohio. Of those, 108 are in Central Ohio — and of those, many are in residential areas. I should know — there's an Amazon data center campus across the street from my house, and three others within five miles — all surrounded by homes and businesses. SB 2 and HB 15 would allow the owners of these data centers to get approval in 45 days to build a large electricity generation plant on property they own with no local approval. How would the electricity be generated? Through fracked gas plants, Senate President Rob McColley and House Speaker Matt Huffman recently told the Ohio Oil and Gas Association. In Ohio, the setback requirement for wind turbines is 1/4 mile from the nearest property line — too much for data center land in an urban or suburban area. A solar project big enough to create enough electricity would also be too large. The main alternative is gas. Senate Bill 52 from 2021 allows local governments to ban solar and wind projects, but not oil and gas — and at least 24 Ohio counties have done so. Already applications for three gas plants to power data centers 'behind the meter' have been filed with the power siting board, with more being prepared. 'We think there will be new gas powered generation all over the state of Ohio,' Huffman told the oil and gas association. If SB 2 and HB 15 pass as currently written, some of those gas plants will end up in residential areas. Where will the gas to supply these plants come from? From fracking our state parks, wildlife areas, and public lands, Huffman told the oil and gas association. And they want the frack pads to be located not just outside the parks as they are now, but actually IN our state parks and public lands. 'I want to be aggressive about that in the House of Representatives,' Huffman said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SB 2 and HB 15 would go a long way to cleaning up the travesty of HB 6 — but at what cost? The accelerated review process for approving major energy facilities — such as a 100 MW gas plant — must be lengthened. Nine months is not too long to review such a complicated project. If Republicans absolutely refuse to lengthen the review process, then local officials must be given veto power over gas plants in their counties and townships — just as they have for solar and wind projects. Finally, fracking in, around, and under our beloved state parks, wildlife areas, and public lands must stop. The vast majority of Ohioans are opposed. The last four nominations to frack our parks and wildlife areas received 923 comments. Only one comment out of 923 was in favor. That's 1/10th of one percent – 99.9% of comments were opposed. We can't build fracked gas plants to power AI and crypto on the backs of our communities and our public lands that are supposed to be protected. Ohio must work toward a sane energy policy that welcomes clean renewable energy that sustains rather than destroys people and planet. Cathy Cowan Becker is board president for Save Ohio Parks. She lives in Hilliard, Ohio. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Yahoo
Another big Ohio solar project bites the dust
Months of proactive community engagement appeared to be paying off for the developer of the Grange Solar Grazing Center agrivoltaics project in central Ohio. Open Road Renewables knew it faced an uphill battle before the state energy-siting board, whose recent deference to local opponents has helped make Ohio one of the most challenging places in the country to build large solar arrays. So the company showed up early and often in Logan County, listening to residents' feedback and committing millions of dollars in donations for community investments. As public comments rolled into state regulators, the developer reviewed the submissions last month and found a clear majority of those weighing in supported its plan. The analysis filtered out hundreds of repeat comments, at least 140 of which came from just 16 people who mostly opposed the project. Optimism around Grange Solar lasted only days, however. On Feb. 21, staff at the Ohio Power Siting Board recommended denying the project's permit: 'Staff believes that any benefits to the local community are outweighed by the overwhelming documented public opposition and, therefore, the project would not serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.' Open Road Renewables withdrew its application for Grange Solar late last week, making it at least the fifth large solar project in Ohio to be canceled over the past 15 months. The case highlights the power that local opponents have to block renewable energy projects in Ohio, even when they otherwise check all the boxes for regulatory approval. It also raises the question: What more can developers do? Open Road Renewables held listening sessions last spring for its up to 500-megawatt solar farm to learn about community concerns and address them even before applying for its permit. Beyond the $5 million in annual local tax revenue the development was expected to generate, the company committed $10 million in donations for a community center, public safety, a river cleanup, job training, and other programs. 'All legitimate concerns about the project were addressed and the benefits would have been spread far and wide,' Doug Herling, vice president of Open Road Renewables, said in an emailed statement. The section of the siting board staff's report that focuses on whether Grange Solar serves the public interest does not discuss local benefits. Nor does it address statewide public-interest issues, such as growing energy needs, efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and projected positive economic impacts. The staff report also does not address conflict-of-interest issues and procedural problems raised by the developer about some of the local governments' filings. And it doesn't mention the company's analysis of public comments, showing that three-fourths of those who had commented on the project supported it. The staff recommendation also does not consider the merits of opponents' reasons for not wanting Grange Solar to move ahead. '[T]he dozens of pages of the [Power Siting Board] staff report represent rigorous analysis and thorough fact-checking of every aspect of Grange's planned project,' Herling said. 'But there is no such fact-checking of the onslaught of anti-solar propaganda, which caused local officials to make statements against solar.' Renewable energy developments face increasing headwinds across the country, often fueled by misinformation. Research released last June by Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law identifies hundreds of projects encountering significant opposition across 47 states. And a July 2024 report from the watchdog organization Energy and Policy Institute lists multiple fossil-fuel companies with links to anti-renewable front groups and activists. Withdrawing the Grange Solar application was a difficult business decision, Herling said in a phone interview with Canary Media. Management at the company felt it could have eventually won, if not at the Ohio Power Siting Board then perhaps on appeal. But even if the company did prevail, it had no guarantee on how long that would take. And Grange Solar is not the only site Open Road Renewables has been working on. 'The decision to withdraw the application is not surprising when you consider the cost of the administrative proceedings, hearings, and appeals that lay ahead and the challenge of persuading the Ohio Power Siting Board to override the recommendation of its staff to deny the application,' said Matthew Eisenson, a lawyer with Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. He represented two landowners who had agreed to lease their property for the Grange Solar project. The Ohio Power Siting Board's staff report acknowledges that Grange Solar is exempt from terms in a 2021 law, Senate Bill 52, which let counties block most large new solar projects. Two representatives from the host county and townships would still have served as ad hoc siting board members for deciding the case. 'However, the [Power Siting Board] staff's recommendation to deny the application when the only purported defect was the existence of local opposition, particularly opposition from local government officials, is analogous to giving local government officials veto power,' Eisenson said. 'Our voices were heard,' said Aubrey Snapp, a representative of the Indian Lake Advocacy Group, which has opposed Grange Solar and applauded its demise in a Feb. 28 statement. Other stakeholders had very different reactions. The regulatory staff's recommendation to block the Grange Solar Grazing Center 'not only disregards the needs of Logan County workers and their families, but also squanders the potential for Logan County to become a leader in renewable energy and attract further investment,' said a statement from IBEW Local 32, the local chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which its lawyer in the case, Daniel Loud, provided to Canary Media. The union also found fault with the local government leaders who opposed the solar farm. 'Local decision-makers have a fundamental responsibility to prioritize the economic well-being of their communities. By rejecting the Grange Solar project, they have failed to uphold this responsibility and have jeopardized the livelihoods of countless workers and families.'
