Solar farms can benefit wildlife
September 15, 2024 7:33 PM Subscribe
In Britain, solar farms can benefit wildlife.
A 2016 paper found that solar farms tended to have more species of plant, insect and bird than equivalent farm fields. Earlier research from 2013 seemed to support this finding: when compared to the surrounding farmland, which the solar farm used to be a part of, greater numbers of butterflies and bees were found on the site.
More recently, a series of reports illustrated the benefits of solar farms for bumblebees, honeybees and pollinator populations more generally. Where solar farms are managed in a way that allows flowers to grow from April to early autumn, these insects have more places to forage and breed. It stands to reason that bigger insect populations would benefit species that feed on them, such as small mammals, bats and birds. Solar panels can provide some birds with a place to nest and perch while small mammals such as field voles can gain hiding places from birds of prey.
Solar panels also create their own microclimates by casting shade and changing the pattern of rainfall landing on the ground. Evidence from the UK indicates lower ground temperatures, light and moisture are found beneath panels compared with adjacent farm fields. While this could disadvantage some grassland species which prefer more direct sunlight, it presents an opportunity for their shade-tolerant counterparts.
The patterns of shading created by the panels offer a range of habitats for plants, with those in the shade often flowering later. Pollinators generally need flowers into October, so a range of flowering times helps to extend the time they can spend foraging. The potential to grow crops in the microclimates under panels, a system called agrivoltaics, is also being explored.
Biodiversity below ground and the soil may also benefit from solar farm installations. The switch from intensive agriculture to permanent grassland means less fertiliser, insecticide and herbicide, and less disturbance from ploughing. This could allow the health of the soil to improve, although more research is needed to confirm and quantify this effect.
A 2016 paper found that solar farms tended to have more species of plant, insect and bird than equivalent farm fields. Earlier research from 2013 seemed to support this finding: when compared to the surrounding farmland, which the solar farm used to be a part of, greater numbers of butterflies and bees were found on the site.
More recently, a series of reports illustrated the benefits of solar farms for bumblebees, honeybees and pollinator populations more generally. Where solar farms are managed in a way that allows flowers to grow from April to early autumn, these insects have more places to forage and breed. It stands to reason that bigger insect populations would benefit species that feed on them, such as small mammals, bats and birds. Solar panels can provide some birds with a place to nest and perch while small mammals such as field voles can gain hiding places from birds of prey.
Solar panels also create their own microclimates by casting shade and changing the pattern of rainfall landing on the ground. Evidence from the UK indicates lower ground temperatures, light and moisture are found beneath panels compared with adjacent farm fields. While this could disadvantage some grassland species which prefer more direct sunlight, it presents an opportunity for their shade-tolerant counterparts.
The patterns of shading created by the panels offer a range of habitats for plants, with those in the shade often flowering later. Pollinators generally need flowers into October, so a range of flowering times helps to extend the time they can spend foraging. The potential to grow crops in the microclimates under panels, a system called agrivoltaics, is also being explored.
Biodiversity below ground and the soil may also benefit from solar farm installations. The switch from intensive agriculture to permanent grassland means less fertiliser, insecticide and herbicide, and less disturbance from ploughing. This could allow the health of the soil to improve, although more research is needed to confirm and quantify this effect.
What I also read before was that plants have to divert resources towards repairing cell damage from UV radiation, and the rate limiting step in plant growth often isn't the sunlight itself, so too much sun can actually hamper crop production. Also stands to reason that from an evolution point of view, most plants didn't evolve in a bare open field with not a single tree for shade.
posted by xdvesper at 8:05 PM on September 15
posted by xdvesper at 8:05 PM on September 15
I used to do environmental monitoring when solar plants were going up and we would have so many nesting bird issues. Because the fence around the sites would keep out big predators it felt like every ground nesting bird would show up. I spent a few weeks sitting near a poorwill nest once to make sure the construction wouldn’t bother it, it didn’t. Raised two chicks, which were very cute! Other wildlife I got used to seeing were burrowing owls, killdeer, plus so many rabbits. I’m already pretty darn pro solar but working those sites really cemented that opinion.
posted by lepus at 8:17 PM on September 15 [19 favorites]
posted by lepus at 8:17 PM on September 15 [19 favorites]
solar farms tended to have more species of plant, insect and bird than equivalent farm fields
Managing solar farms for wildlife seems like a great idea, but honestly this is a very low bar. If there was one thing I would try and get people to understand about conservation, it’s that green spaces are not inherently good for wildlife.
The same applies to people’s enthusiasm for building on brownfield sites. Brownfield land is often pretty good for wildlife precisely because it hasn’t been used as farmland.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 11:58 PM on September 15 [3 favorites]
Managing solar farms for wildlife seems like a great idea, but honestly this is a very low bar. If there was one thing I would try and get people to understand about conservation, it’s that green spaces are not inherently good for wildlife.
The same applies to people’s enthusiasm for building on brownfield sites. Brownfield land is often pretty good for wildlife precisely because it hasn’t been used as farmland.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 11:58 PM on September 15 [3 favorites]
And yet a local solar farm proposal has just been killed in the planning process by idiot NIMBYs who insist, along with other utter bollocks, that it would be bad for biodiversity.
posted by Dysk at 12:21 AM on September 16 [2 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 12:21 AM on September 16 [2 favorites]
If there was one thing I would try and get people to understand about conservation, it’s that green spaces are not inherently good for wildlife.
I think some of the ideas from Agrivoltiacs (solar farm space which is also designed to support farming) with a particular view of optimizing for wildlife support.
posted by rongorongo at 1:30 AM on September 16 [2 favorites]
I think some of the ideas from Agrivoltiacs (solar farm space which is also designed to support farming) with a particular view of optimizing for wildlife support.
posted by rongorongo at 1:30 AM on September 16 [2 favorites]
There are not a lot of energy generation technologies whose main side effect is creating pleasant spaces in which to sit. Solar PV FTW.
posted by flabdablet at 1:48 AM on September 16 [4 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 1:48 AM on September 16 [4 favorites]
I'm also very interested in the possibilities of solar panels and pasture land being combined, as a way to combat soil fertility issues - Forty years of pasturing livestock underneath solar panels would result in massively improved soil health making it suitable for a five year rotation to crop land. If land that would be suitable for solar is being rezoned for agriculture, maybe the way forward is a compromise. And while pasture land may not allow for the same diversity that wild meadow would, there are some other distinct advantages to pasture land, for example the fact that grazing cows on an area is a really good way to stop the advance of invasive Japanese knotweed.
Livestock is happier with a vast array of different meadow plants. They are as happy on a diet of nothing but field grazed alfalfa as you would be on a diet of nothing but potatoes, so pasturing animals on diverse species meadows is not a bad thing for the animals - meanwhile there are hundreds of thousands of meadow species that have evolved over the centuries to either be grazing tolerant or to thrive better when they are grazed. Remember, without grazing meadow land reverts to scrub. Grazing meadows is an alternative to fighting a perpetual battle with alders that want to take over.
But mainly I suspect that the opposition to renewable power is being financed by power companies who don't want their business model damaged under any circumstances. There is a local wind farm project where I live which is garnering a lot of opposition and that opposition is being quietly spearheaded by employees of the provincial electrical power company. The wind farm is to be built by a local corporation that intends to own and use the power for their operations, and the provincial company can see how their profits generated by the sale of power to that corporation is going to dwindle. They really don't want to lose their monopoly and are fighting hard.
Our fight to transition to renewables is being opposed by a huge number of people whose current livelihood and well being is dependent on the maintenance of the status quo - they are like people who have homes on an eroding shoreline. They see no personal alternatives to trying to stop inexorable forces, and are pulling every string they can to slow it down. Because of where they are situated, they don't see any option except resisting.
posted by Jane the Brown at 5:23 AM on September 16 [7 favorites]
Livestock is happier with a vast array of different meadow plants. They are as happy on a diet of nothing but field grazed alfalfa as you would be on a diet of nothing but potatoes, so pasturing animals on diverse species meadows is not a bad thing for the animals - meanwhile there are hundreds of thousands of meadow species that have evolved over the centuries to either be grazing tolerant or to thrive better when they are grazed. Remember, without grazing meadow land reverts to scrub. Grazing meadows is an alternative to fighting a perpetual battle with alders that want to take over.
But mainly I suspect that the opposition to renewable power is being financed by power companies who don't want their business model damaged under any circumstances. There is a local wind farm project where I live which is garnering a lot of opposition and that opposition is being quietly spearheaded by employees of the provincial electrical power company. The wind farm is to be built by a local corporation that intends to own and use the power for their operations, and the provincial company can see how their profits generated by the sale of power to that corporation is going to dwindle. They really don't want to lose their monopoly and are fighting hard.
Our fight to transition to renewables is being opposed by a huge number of people whose current livelihood and well being is dependent on the maintenance of the status quo - they are like people who have homes on an eroding shoreline. They see no personal alternatives to trying to stop inexorable forces, and are pulling every string they can to slow it down. Because of where they are situated, they don't see any option except resisting.
posted by Jane the Brown at 5:23 AM on September 16 [7 favorites]
(There are huge areas where the pre-industrial ecosystem was grass without trees; usually because of an annual dry period long enough to kill tree seedlings, often because of the fire regime (related!), sometimes winds. Grazers/browsers certainly help.
There are also big areas where plant growth *is* light-limited (light in the warm-and-wet-enough season). Ecosystems vary.)
It’s still amazing that PV installations dense enough to warrant intertie emergy are biodiversity friendly anywhere. Although. Come to think of it, I’ve known a bunch of plant and invertebrate researchers who worked in bombing ranges in California because *bombing ranges* had more of their species than anywhere else, including any kind of park. Radioactivity-contaminated sites too, right? Ecosystems vary.
posted by clew at 7:54 AM on September 16
There are also big areas where plant growth *is* light-limited (light in the warm-and-wet-enough season). Ecosystems vary.)
It’s still amazing that PV installations dense enough to warrant intertie emergy are biodiversity friendly anywhere. Although. Come to think of it, I’ve known a bunch of plant and invertebrate researchers who worked in bombing ranges in California because *bombing ranges* had more of their species than anywhere else, including any kind of park. Radioactivity-contaminated sites too, right? Ecosystems vary.
posted by clew at 7:54 AM on September 16
There are also big areas where plant growth *is* light-limited
Did you see what latitude the article was talking about?
posted by ambrosen at 8:26 AM on September 16
Did you see what latitude the article was talking about?
posted by ambrosen at 8:26 AM on September 16
It’s hardly ever the research article that over generalizes and sometimes not even the scientific press release, but the desire to have one cool techno answer kicks in right after that.
posted by clew at 11:28 AM on September 16
posted by clew at 11:28 AM on September 16
So the paper linked here via "microclimates" Solar panels also create their own microclimates by casting shade and changing the pattern of rainfall landing on the ground. Evidence from the UK indicates lower ground temperatures, light and moisture are found beneath panels compared with adjacent farm fields.
... does not actually investigate farm fields, but PV famrs and natural grass ecosystems. This is what it has to say:
"Further, the diurnal variation in both temperature and humidity during the summer was reduced under the PV arrays. We found microclimate and vegetation management explained differences in the above ground plant biomass and species diversity, with both lower under the PV arrays. Photosynthesis and net ecosystem exchange in spring and winter were also lower under the PV arrays, explained by microclimate, soil and vegetation metrics."
Contradicting this non-specific statement:
Biodiversity below ground and the soil may also benefit from solar farm installations.
And
the conclusion from the paper linked at More recently, a series of reports illustrated the benefits of solar farms for bumblebees, honeybees and pollinator populations more generally:
"However, current key knowledge gaps exist around how solar parks are currently managed and this information would be useful in shaping optimal management regimes. Furthermore, knowledge gaps exist where the impact of interventions on pollinators were “inconclusive” or “unresolved” and hence future research effort is required to better understand the impacts of certain practices on pollinator biodiversity. "
Further, the paper linked via "honeybees" in the previous sentence is a discussion of putting beehives in solar parks, not creating pollinator habitat, and it has not been ascertained how these hives might impact natural pollinators: " However, the viability of this is uncertain given other factors that influence crop location and the potential trade-offs with wild pollinators".
So, I don't feel like clicking on every link, but I find this article pretty shady, intimating conclusions which are not supported by the very papers they are linking to.
posted by oneirodynia at 5:42 PM on September 16 [1 favorite]
... does not actually investigate farm fields, but PV famrs and natural grass ecosystems. This is what it has to say:
"Further, the diurnal variation in both temperature and humidity during the summer was reduced under the PV arrays. We found microclimate and vegetation management explained differences in the above ground plant biomass and species diversity, with both lower under the PV arrays. Photosynthesis and net ecosystem exchange in spring and winter were also lower under the PV arrays, explained by microclimate, soil and vegetation metrics."
Contradicting this non-specific statement:
Biodiversity below ground and the soil may also benefit from solar farm installations.
And
the conclusion from the paper linked at More recently, a series of reports illustrated the benefits of solar farms for bumblebees, honeybees and pollinator populations more generally:
"However, current key knowledge gaps exist around how solar parks are currently managed and this information would be useful in shaping optimal management regimes. Furthermore, knowledge gaps exist where the impact of interventions on pollinators were “inconclusive” or “unresolved” and hence future research effort is required to better understand the impacts of certain practices on pollinator biodiversity. "
Further, the paper linked via "honeybees" in the previous sentence is a discussion of putting beehives in solar parks, not creating pollinator habitat, and it has not been ascertained how these hives might impact natural pollinators: " However, the viability of this is uncertain given other factors that influence crop location and the potential trade-offs with wild pollinators".
So, I don't feel like clicking on every link, but I find this article pretty shady, intimating conclusions which are not supported by the very papers they are linking to.
posted by oneirodynia at 5:42 PM on September 16 [1 favorite]
« Older R1/B5, 5-7-5 | “Olivença é portuguesa, naturalmente" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
But "Liz Truss, the new UK prime minister" .. lol, nope! what a brief window the article fits in despite being undated, briefer than the life of a 60p lettuce.
posted by anadem at 7:45 PM on September 15 [7 favorites]