Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Are solar projects harming biodiversity?

What the science says...

When applying best practices for project design, large-scale solar farms can sustain and even increase local biodiversity by replanting indigenous flowering species that benefit insects, mammals, and ground nesting birds.

Climate Myth...

Solar projects harm biodiversity

"Construction of an industrial-scale solar powerplant ... creat[es] an ecological wasteland." (Citizens for Responsible Solar)

The impact of solar development on biodiversity depends on-site specific conditions, such as the local ecosystem, the existing land use, the density of development, and the management practices employed at the site. When applying best practices for project design, including by incorporating pollinator habitat and minimizing soil disturbance, large-scale solar farms on previously developed land, including farmland, can sustain and even increase local biodiversity (Sinha et al. 2018). While developing solar projects on previously undeveloped land may contribute to habitat loss and degradation, as well as negative impacts to local biodiversity, these impacts can be mitigated by avoiding bulldozing and by creating wildlife corridors and habitat patches inside the footprint of the facility where soil and vegetation is not disturbed (Grodsky et al. 2021, Suuronen et al. 2017, Sawyer et al. 2022).

Microclimates within solar farms can enhance botanical diversity, which, in turn can enhance the diversity of the site’s invertebrate and bird populations. In addition, the shade under solar panels can offer critical habitat for a wide range of species, including endangered species1 (also Graham et al. 2021). Shady patches likewise prevent soil moisture loss, boosting plant growth and diversity, particularly in areas impacted by climate extremes (Barron-Gafford et al. 2019).

Proactive measures taken before and after a solar farm’s construction can further enhance biodiversity. Prior to installation, developers can mitigate adverse impacts by examining native species’ feeding, mating and migratory patterns and ensuring that solar projects are not sited in sensitive locations or constructed at sensitive times2. For example, developers can schedule construction to coincide with indigenous reptiles’ and amphibians’ hibernation periods, while avoiding breeding periods.

Additionally, developers can invest in habitat restoration once solar projects have been installed, such as by replanting indigenous flowering species that provide nectar to insects, which also benefits mammals and ground nesting birds. A recent study on the impact of newly-established insect habitat on solar farms in agricultural landscapes found increases in floral abundance, flowering plant species richness, insect group diversity, native bee abundance, and total insect abundance (Walston et al. 2023).

Pollinators play a crucial role in U.S. farming, with more than one third of crop production reliant on pollinators3. Bee populations alone contribute an estimated $20 billion annually to U.S. agriculture production and up to $217 billion worldwide. Recognizing these important contributions, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Technologies Office is currently funding or tracking numerous studies that seek to maximize solar farms’ positive impacts on pollinator-friendly plants4.


Footnotes:

[1] Hannah Montag et al., The effects of solar farms on local biodiversity at 34 (Apr. 2016)

[2] The Biodiversity Consultancy, Mitigating biodiversity impacts associated with solar and wind energy development, IUCN (2021), 12

[3] Pollinator Habitat Planting: CP42, U.S. Dep’t Agriculture (last visited March 25, 2024).

[4] Buzzing Around Solar: Pollinator Habitat Under Solar Arrays, U.S. Dep’t Energy (Jun. 21, 2022)

This rebuttal is based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Skeptical Science sincerely appreciates Sabin Center's generosity in collaborating with us to make this information available as widely as possible.

Last updated on 26 October 2024 by Sabin Center Team. View Archives

Printable Version  |  Offline PDF Version  |  Link to this page

Argument Feedback

Please use this form to let us know about suggested updates to this rebuttal.

Comments

There have been no comments posted yet.

Post a Comment

Political, off-topic or ad hominem comments will be deleted. Comments Policy...

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.

Link to this page



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us