Kevin Violette, the owner of a 200-acre one-time dairy farm in Fairfield, hopes new state energy rules will transform his land made useless by so-called forever chemicals into a solar operation.

The Public Utilities Commission on Tuesday approved rules that pave the way for large-scale solar development on farmland polluted by PFAS.

Fred Stone’s dairy farm in Arundel was the first in Maine to have his Arundel dairy farm shut down due to PFAS contamination and hasn’t been able to make a living since 2017. Gregory Rec/Staff Photographer

Policymakers and environmentalists hope the change will continue the expansion of renewable energy in Maine and allow farmers to make money off land that could otherwise take years to make viable again.

“To farm the sun with solar panels would be a success,” Violette said Wednesday. “It’s a revenue stream to keep people on title and pay taxes.”

The PUC approved the rules this week following 2023 state legislation that calls for renewable energy generated on land contaminated by PFAS.

Utilities are now directed to buy the power and incorporate it in their standard offer, the default electricity supply for nine out of 10 home and small-business customers.

Projects on 5 acres or slightly more have come before the Fairfield Planning Board, said Violette, who is chairman. Utilities are now required to negotiate for larger renewable power projects on land damaged by PFAS. “We’d need hundreds of acres or thousands of acres,” he said.

CONTAMINATED FARMS

Test results confirm that 68 Maine farms are affected by PFAS, according to the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry. In particular, 32 have at least one residential or agricultural water source that is polluted and 19 have a water and field that are contaminated.

The farms recover and return to business, “by and large,” spokesman Jim Britt said. Four have closed.

“The impact a high water or soil test will have on a farm’s operations will be highly dependent upon their specific product, management practices and size of the operation,” he said.

With technical and financial help from the state, many affected farms can make adjustments to their operations and safely farm, Britt said. That could mean changing feed sources, installing water filtration systems or switching to a crop that is not susceptible to PFAS uptake.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are called forever chemicals because they can remain in the environment for decades. Even trace amounts have been linked to compromised immune systems, low birth weights and several types of cancer.

Violette said thousands of acres of Fairfield farmland, mostly for dairy, are unusable because of PFAS in toxic chemicals left behind by a defunct state-approved sludge-spreading program that dates to the 1970s. The only activity on much of the land now is clearing brush, he said.

“We have no use for this property,” he said. “We can’t sell hay. We can’t sell loam. There’s nothing you can do to pay your taxes.”

Installing solar arrays on hundreds and thousands of acres would be the “smartest and best move,” Violette said.

A ‘GOOD PATH FORWARD’

Eliza Donoghue, executive director of the Maine Renewable Energy Association, said the PUC action is a “good path forward,” though details remain, such as a bidding process among solar developers before regulators. The PUC routinely procures renewable energy, but this program is different because it establishes a preference for contaminated land to serve as renewable power sites, she said.

Donoghue said she believes it will lead to larger-scale projects in the “many-megawatts size.”

The law, which also encourages use of brownfields sites, would lead to a procurement process – developers submitting bids to the PUC – to sell renewable power to contract for 5% of Maine’s 2021 retail electricity sales, or about 400 megawatts, enough to power 400,000 or more homes.

Sen. Stacy Brenner, D-Scarborough, co-chair of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee, told lawmakers last year that more than 700 sites across the state were licensed for land application of biosolids that includes wastewater sludge and septage, “meaning that PFAS contamination is likely widespread.” And no remediation is available, she said.

Shelley Megquier, policy and research director of the Maine Farmland Trust, told lawmakers last year that allowing solar development would allow farmers to realize value from land that “may need to be restricted from farming for years to come” because of the pollution.

Megquier also warned that with the increase in renewable energy development in Maine, “so, too, has our understanding of the impacts that these projects can have on the amount of farmland taken out of agricultural production, the loss of important agricultural soils and the competition for land that farmers need to lease in order to support their operations.”

The Nature Conservancy recommended to the PUC that the environmental benefits from siting a solar project on contaminated lands should be considered a ratepayer benefit when comparing projects. Solar arrays that would be sited on contaminated lands are likely to be costlier than those that are not on polluted property, the group said.

As a result, a lower-cost project would stand a better chance of being selected and the intent of the legislation and regulatory rule, encouraging siting renewable generation on contaminated land, would be lost, the Nature Conservancy said.

It’s not the first state action to help farmers coping with PFAS. In March, the DACF began making available $70 million that includes $10 million in federal money, to help farmers get their business back up, provide compensation for contaminated land, medical needs and scientific research.