Where to place new utility scale solar projects has become a major topic of conversation across Indiana. As new wind and solar projects are proposed, it’s natural for communities to ask questions about reliability, farmland, costs, and long-term impacts.
Unfortunately, a number of persistent myths continue to circulate. Here’s a closer look at six of the most common ones—and what the evidence actually shows.
Myth: Renewables don’t work when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.
Reality: Solar panels generate power from sunlight, not just direct sunshine.
Even on cloudy days, sunlight still reaches the earth’s surface. Known as diffuse solar radiation, this sunlight scatters through clouds and the atmosphere. Solar panels can convert this diffuse light into electricity, though at a reduced output compared to bright sunshine.
Additionally, the electric grid has never relied on a single power source operating continuously.
Coal plants go offline for maintenance. Natural gas plants experience fuel supply interruptions. Nuclear plants periodically shut down for refueling. The grid is designed to manage these variations by combining multiple energy sources across large geographic areas.
Utilities are increasingly pairing solar with battery storage to provide additional reliability. For example, a new battery storage system operated by AES can store 200 megawatts of electricity. This helps to maximize the benefit of solar by making the energy it produces available even if the sun isn’t shining in the moment the energy is needed.
Myth: Solar might be good in sunny places, like Florida or Arizona, but not here.
Reality: Even in the Midwest, there is still plenty of sunlight
Solar power works in regions with cloudier climates because panels capture both direct and diffuse sunlight.
In fact, Indiana is already a leader when it comes to producing utility-scale energy with solar. Indiana is currently ranked 11th in the country for solar production, with over 6500 MW of capacity.
The reason that solar is so common in Indiana is because, when combined with other options, it is a part of the best overall portfolio in Indiana. When utilities plan for how to meet their energy needs, they are required to consider 5 factors, including affordability. They choose solar because it delivers cheap, reliable power, even in Indiana’s climate.
The key point is simple: as long as daylight reaches the panels, they continue generating electricity.
Myth: Large solar projects are taking over Indiana’s useful farmland.
Reality: Even with growing solar development, the amount of land used for solar remains extremely small compared to the state’s agricultural footprint.
Indiana is one of the most productive agricultural states in the country, with about 14.6 million acres of farmland.
We’re already using much of that land (43%) for energy production through ethanol. With that same acreage, Indiana could produce up to 100 times as much energy through solar as compared to ethanol.
But the real impact of solar on Indiana’s farmland is much, much lower than 43%. Between 2013 and 2021, Indiana only lost 5% of farmland due to energy production (of any type including wind, natural, gas, and biomass). Most farmland loss resulted from residential developments, not solar.
Even for land that does add solar, it doesn’t necessarily take away the productive agricultural capacity of the land. Solar can also coexist with agriculture in several ways:
- Sheep grazing between panels
- Pollinator-friendly vegetation that improves soil health
- Agrivoltaics, where crops grow under raised solar panels
Solar leases can also provide stable income for farmers, helping keep family farms financially viable when crop yields or prices are low.
And no solar farm is permanent. After the lifetime of the project (typically 25-35 years), the land typically returns to farmland as it was before.
Myth: Solar is only cheaper than coal because of subsidies.
Reality: Solar is becoming dramatically less expensive due to technological improvements and manufacturing scale.
Renewables provide the lowest cost and easiest to deploy of potential energy sources. This is primarily due to the cost of solar panels decreasing dramatically in the last two decades.
The cost-competitive nature of solar remains true, even when subsidies are removed.
Solar also includes no fuel costs once built. Unlike gas and coal, there is nothing to buy or burn after solar is built. This means that if the cost of gas goes up, the cost of energy produced by gas does too, but since there is no gas to power a solar panel, the cost to operate remains constant and low, no matter what the economic conditions are.
What’s more: Independent analysis shows that new solar generation is often cheaper than operating many existing coal plants and definitely cheaper than new coal plants.
While solar is getting cheaper, coal plants face rising costs from:
- Aging infrastructure
- Fuel transportation
- Pollution control equipment
- Maintenance and reliability issues
This is why utilities across the country—including in the Midwest—are increasingly turning to solar and other clean energy resources as a lower-cost option for customers.
Myth: Solar leaves the soil contaminated when the panels are removed.
Reality: Solar may be better for soil health than row cropping.
Solar has relatively low impact to begin with. The components of solar panels are sealed inside the panel and designed to operate outdoors for decades without releasing contaminants.
Much of the information circulating about the supposed toxicity of solar panels is based on panels designed for outer space and not relevant to the panels we use today in modern utility scale solar.
Much of the rest of the concern about solar toxicity has to do with the end of a project’s life cycle, but concerns on this are also overblown. In reality, at the end of a project’s life cycle:
- Panels can be recycled, recovering materials like glass and aluminum
- Developers are typically required to remove equipment and restore the site
- Many local ordinances require decommissioning plans or financial assurance to guarantee cleanup
Because solar sites are often planted with perennial vegetation and see minimal soil disturbance, soil health may improve during the life of a solar project compared to conventional row cropping.
Myth: The choice is between solar in my backyard or keeping that land farmland.
Reality: Indiana needs more electricity. The true choice is between solar and polluting gas or coal.
It’s easy to frame the debate about solar development as a choice between protecting farmland and allowing solar panels. But that framing misses a key reality: Indiana’s electricity demand is growing rapidly, and the state will need to build new energy resources to meet it.
The real choice isn’t between solar and nothing. It’s between solar and other types of new power plants, most commonly natural gas.
Indiana utilities and regional grid planners have projected significant growth in electricity demand in the coming years, primarily due to new AI data centers. Meeting that demand requires building new generation somewhere.
When communities reject solar projects, utilities typically turn to new fossil fuel plants instead. Those facilities require land as well—but they also bring ongoing fuel costs and air pollution.
Solar offers a different path. Solar farms generate electricity without fuel combustion, air pollution, or water consumption, and most projects are temporary land uses that can be removed after a few decades.
When we think about this decision, HEC urges Hoosiers not to consider the tradeoff between solar versus farmland. Instead, it’s important to frame the conversation in terms of whether new electricity demand will be met with clean energy or additional fossil fuel infrastructure.
The Bottom Line
Renewable energy is not a silver bullet, but it is an essential part of increasing Hoosiers’ access to affordable, clean energy. Solar technology in particular is increasingly:
- Reliable, when integrated into a diverse grid
- Cost-effective for customers
- Compatible with agriculture
- Environmentally manageable over the long term
As Indiana’s electricity demand grows, accurate information will be essential to building an energy system that is affordable, reliable, and sustainable for decades to come.
Categories: Sustainable Development and Green Infrastructure