The Sentinel: Environment

League of Women Voters speak out on concerns at Illinois state capitol

The League of Women Voters of Illinois meets with lawmakers on Lobby Day to address key social and environmental issues.

League of Women Voters of Illinois members in Springfield

Photo courtesy League of Women Voters of Illinois

League of Women Voters of Illinois members gather in Springfield for their annual Lobby Day on Wednesday. Experienced League members and members of the new Volunteer Lobby Corps met face-to-face with state legislators.

SPRINGFIELD - The League of Women Voters of Illinois (LWVIL) returned to the Illinois State Capitol on Wednesday, May 8, for its annual Lobby Day, engaging with lawmakers across the political spectrum to advocate for a range of policy issues.

This year’s event marked the debut of the organization’s newly established Volunteer Lobby Corps, a group of trained advocates who joined experienced League members in meeting face-to-face with legislators. Prior to their Capitol meetings, the volunteers underwent orientation led by seasoned members to prepare for discussions with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan group, bases its advocacy on positions it has thoroughly studied and reached consensus on. According to LWVIL President Becky Simon, the group continues to press for voting rights protections and initiatives aimed at building a more equitable democratic system.

“LWVIL advocates to protect voting rights and advance a more equitable democracy,” Simon stated. “The League stands up for social justice issues because systemic inequities prohibit people from participating equally in our democracy.”

This year’s lobbying priorities included the defense of Constitutional rights and efforts to ensure equity in both education and housing. Local chapters of the League were also encouraged to raise district-specific issues with their representatives. These included managing environmental waste and safeguarding aquifers from potential contaminants.

The organization’s Capitol visit is part of a broader effort to maintain a visible presence in public policy discussions and to empower volunteers to take active roles in civic engagement.

Related articles:

Commentary |
The path forward for real environmentalism

by Sam Holmes

Guest Commentator

As the country and world grapple with an ongoing pollution crisis and demands for cleaner energy, the discourse on combating the negative environmental consequences of human civilization almost universally revolves around renewable energy and “sustainable living.” Yet, there is one crucial tool that is almost universally overlooked in this conversation, and that is the use of nuclear energy.

Despite its clear potential andproven track record of powering the lives of millions around the world with minimal environmental damage, the use of nuclear energy remains an issue that is very divisive. It’s time for us to embrace nuclear power as a cornerstone of what real environmentalism looks like, a cornerstone that prioritizes both sustainability and human prosperity.

At its core, environmentalism is about preserving the planet for future generations, safeguarding ecosystems, and ensuring that the constant stream of human progress doesn't come at the detrimental cost of environmental destruction. Yet, the universal consensus on how we should do so seems to be entirely focused on wind, solar, bioenergy, and carbon capture. While some of those efforts can be useful in certain circumstances, they are not without severe limitations.

For example, solar and wind energy are intermittent, relying on favorable weather conditions. They require vast amounts of land to even produce the same energy output as traditional sources such as oil or natural gas. Whereas in contrast, nuclear energy offers a much more stable, reliable, and highly efficient source of energy. In fact, nuclear power plants are built to withstand severe natural disasters of all kinds. Wind and solar, on the other hand, are often damaged beyond repair by mild tropical storms or even the occasional hail event.

Nuclear materials are by far the most efficient source of energy on the planet. A single uranium fuel pellet, which is roughly the size of a fingertip, contains as much energy as 1,780 pounds of coal, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute.

This high density of energy means that nuclear plants require less resources compared to their “renewable” counterparts. In addition, nuclear power plants on average only take up a measly one third of an acre of land, while the average wind farm spans a grotesque 2-40 acres per megawatts produced. Given that a nuclear plant produces on average 1,000 megawatts, at minimum, any given wind farm would require 2,000 acres of land to compete with nuclear energy’s output, as according to the U.S Department Of Energy.

Despite these advantages, the use of nuclear energy remains mired in public skepticism, often due to safety concerns and historical accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima. These events are undeniably tragic with lasting environmental damage, but the media and academia have disingenuously shaped public perception, making nuclear energy appear far worse than its actual track record. Nuclear energy remains among the safest forms of energy ever invented, especially when contrasted to fossil fuels, coal burning, and “renewable” energy sources. While nuclear accidents can have severe consequences, nuclear plants are among the safest and most secure facilities on the face of the planet as a result of past incidents.

As citizens who truly care about the world around us and its longevity, we must call upon our state and federal governments to directly incentivize nuclear technology through tax incentives, joint public-private projects, and academic or federal grants to ensure maximum fluidity.

In summary, the path forward for real environmentalism requires a pragmatic approach that embraces all available tools. While solar and wind energy can be useful in certain circumstances like powering a home or providing energy in remote locations, they cannot even come close to powering the American grid let alone the world for that matter. Which is why nuclear energy, with its reliability, efficiency, and minimal presence, must be recognized as a cornerstone of our future global effort to conserve our beautiful planet.

It’s time to move beyond fear and misconceptions and embrace nuclear energy as the most powerful ally in our admirable fight to safeguard our home for future generations.

About the author:
Sam Holmes is a freshman at the University of Illinois. When he is not studying, he is constantly stimulating his mind and body, whether that be from doing wordles daily or going to the gym and lifting weights. He believes mankind's greatest truth is in embracing our fragility, finding the strength to live authentically and ethically within the mystery of existence.

Chemical contaminates found in Illinois rivers threaten food chain

SNS - Scientists tested nine fish species from four northern Illinois rivers for contamination with per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances, synthetic chemicals found in numerous industrial and commercial products and known to be harmful to human health. They found fish contaminated with PFAS in every one of their 15 test sites. Elevated levels of PFOS, one type of PFAS compound, were found in nearly all fish tested.

Study found that there were high levels of PFASs contamination levels in channel catfish found in Illinois waterways.

G.C./Pixabay

The qualities that make PFAS desirable for industrial uses — their durability and stability under stresses such as high heat or exposure to water, for example — also make these chemicals particularly problematic in the environment and hazardous to human and animal health, said Joseph Irudayaraj, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign who led the new study.

The findings are reported in the journal Science of the Total Environment.

Short-chain PFASs (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are widely used as alternatives to long-chain PFASs. Long-chain PFASs become gradually regulated under REACH (EC No. 1907/2006) and other international regulations, due to having persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic properties and/or being toxic for reproduction. The increasingly used short-chain PFASs are assumed to have a lower bioaccumulation potential.

“PFAS contain multiple carbon-fluorine bonds, one of the strongest bonds in organic chemistry,” Irudayaraj said, who is also a professor in the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology and an affiliate of the Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology and the Carle Illinois College of Medicine at the U. of I. “Because of this, they are also very hard to break down. They persist for a long time because they are very, very stable.”

Considering such permanent exposure, it is very difficult to estimate long-term adverse effects in organisms. Enriched in edible parts of plants, the accumulation in food chains is unknown.

There are nearly 15,000 PFAS chemicals, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. These are classified either as short-chain PFAS, which have less than six carbon-fluorine bonds, and long-chain PFAS, with six or more of these bonds, Irudayaraj said.

Long-chain PFAS were widely used before awareness grew about the hazards of these chemicals. More recently, many industries switched to using short-chain PFAS.

“It was thought that the short-chain PFAS were less toxic, and that they could more easily degrade,” he said. “But surprisingly, that was not the case.”

Now, both types of PFAS are found in groundwater, soil and human tissues.

Short-chain PFASs have a high mobility in soil and water, and final degradation products are extremely persistent. This results in a fast distribution to water resources, and consequently, also to a contamination of drinking water resources. Once emitted, short-chain PFASs remain in the environment. A lack of appropriate water treatment technologies results in everlasting background concentrations in the environment, and thus, organisms are permanently and poorly reversibly exposed. Considering such permanent exposure, it is very difficult to estimate long-term adverse effects in organisms. Enriched in edible parts of plants, the accumulation in food chains is unknown.

“About 99% of people living in the U.S. have PFAS in their system,” Irudayaraj said.

Studies on animals have shown that short-chain PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are almost completely absorbed when ingested or inhaled but not much through the skin. Both short- and long-chain PFAS don't break down easily in the body due to their strong chemical bonds. Even if these chemicals start off in different forms, they eventually turn into acids through several steps, which can be more toxic than the original chemicals. One such toxic substance, perfluorohexyl ethanoic acid (FHEA), has been found in various tissues from deceased people, according to research published by The Danish Environmental Protection Agency in 2015.

The time it takes for these acids to leave the blood varies depending on the specific chemical, the species, and even the sex of the animal. In general, sulfonates (a type of PFAS) take longer to be eliminated than carboxylates (another type), and longer chains take longer to leave the body than shorter ones. In animals, the time is often shorter for females due to differences in how their bodies process these chemicals. The time these substances stay in the blood can range from a few hours to days in rodents, a bit longer in monkeys, and much longer in humans, sometimes lasting years. However, shorter-chain PFAS tend to leave the body faster, except for PFHxS (a six-carbon chain PFAS), which has a longer half-life in humans than some other PFAS like PFOA and PFOS.

Despite a voluntary phasing out of some PFAS in industry in the U.S. and efforts to reduce PFAS pollution, these chemicals are still found in drinking water, household products, food packaging and agricultural products, he said.

Fish from the Rock River had the highest concentrations of PFAS in their tissues.

The manufacturers of chemical products using PFAS argue that the newer short-chain PFAS is safer than the widely known long-chain contaminants. Despite this assertion, the Auburn study's significant findings challenge these statements. The research indicates that short-chain chemicals are frequently present in drinking water systems and could potentially endanger human and environmental well-being. Additionally, current removal methods are relatively less efficient when it comes to eliminating short-chain PFAS in comparison to long-chain PFAS.

The Auburn study analyzed over 200 individual studies on PFAS finding that the short-chain contaminants may be just as harmful as the long-chain versions, if not more. The short-chain PFAS have been linked to hormonal and reproductive system harm.

The researchers in the U of I study focused on fish in northern Illinois rivers because they are close to urban and industrial areas. Industrial emissions and urban rainwater runoff may further contaminate local waterways with PFAS. Sport fishing is also popular across the state, including in areas inside and near Chicago. More than 666,000 fishing licenses were issued across the state of Illinois in 2020.

The researchers narrowed their research down to the fish in the Pecatonica River, Rock River, Sugar River and Yellow Creek from 2021-22. The team collected dozens of samples from nine species of fish, including bluegill, channel catfish, common carp, northern pike, smallmouth bass and walleye. The fish represented different levels of the food chain, from those that feed only on plants, like bluegill, to those eating other fish, such as channel catfish and northern pike.

Back in the lab, the scientists analyzed fish tissues for 17 PFAS chemicals. They found PFAS-contaminated fish in every river they tested and in every one of their 15 sampling sites. Fish from the Rock River had the highest concentrations of PFAS in their tissues. Contamination levels were highest in channel catfish, at the top of the food chain, and lowest in the plant eaters.

Commentary |
Hey Taylor; love the music, but please park that private jet

Photo:Omid Armin/Unsplash

I spent a decade, like many parents, chauffeuring pre-teen and teenage girls around to a Taylor Swift soundtrack. I learned every Swift song as it was released and sang along to the chorus in the car. I even went to one of her first stadium concerts with my young Swifties.

Congrats, Taylor, for your talent and decades of consistently great songwriting. You deserve all the accolades and rewards. Here’s my one request: Give up your private jet.

Those young fans of yours that I used to shuttle around are now campaigning against climate change. They understand this is the critical decade to shift our trajectory away from fossil fuels and towards clean energy.

And they need you, once again, to sing a new song.

Chuck Collins

I know you’re dealing with a lot of crazy conspiracy theories in right-wing media. In their zeal to denounce you, you even succeeded in getting Fox News to admit that private jet travel contributes to climate change, which is no small feat!

They’ve said a lot of nonsense about you, but that part is true. Private jets emit 10 to 20 times more pollutants per passenger than commercial jets. You know it’s wrong — that’s why you cover your face with an umbrella when you’re disembarking.

Maybe it’s even why you’ve decided to sell one of your jets. Why not the other?

We all have that experience of wishing we could be two places at once. I’ve been on a work trip and wished I could zip home for my daughter’s soccer game. But your private flight from your tour in Tokyo to the Super Bowl burned more carbon than six entire average U.S. households will all year.

Like so many challenges in our country, private jet pollution is increasing alongside inequality. According to a report I co-authored for the Institute for Policy Studies, High Flyers 2023, the number of private jets has grown 133 percent over the last two decades. And just 1 percent of flyers now contribute half of all carbon emissions from aviation.

Should we set off a carbon bomb so the ultra-rich can fly to their vacation destinations? More and more Americans are answering no. In Massachusetts, a grassroots coalition called Stop Private Jet Expansion at Hanscom and Everywhere is calling on the governor to reject an airport expansion that would serve private jets. It could inspire similar fights nationally.

Banning or restricting private jet travel would be one of the easiest paths to reducing emissions if it weren’t a luxury consumed by the most wealthy and powerful people on the planet. But climate advocates are still working to find a way. In Congress, Senator Ed Markey and Rep. Nydia Velazquez have proposed hiking the tax on private jet fuel to make sure private jet users pay the real financial and ecological costs of their luxury travel.

There’s good news, Taylor: A generation of music stars toured without jets, taking the proverbial tour bus. And it sparked a lot of great songs about this amazing land.

Taylor, if you want to be green, stay on the ground. Your fans will love you and the future generations will thank you.

I believe there’s a song there.

About the author

Chuck Collins directs the Program on Inequality and co-edits the Inequality.org website at the Institute for Policy Studies. This op-ed was adapted from an earlier version at CommonDreams.org and distributed for syndication by OtherWords.org.

Farm group wants improved safety measures for pipelines running through Illinois

by Terri Dee
Illinois News Connection

A pipeline project to transport carbon dioxide captured from ethanol and fertilizer production to a permanent storage site in Illinois is raising concerns about safety and potential damage to surrounding land.

Last month, members of the Illinois Farm Bureau adopted policies supporting a temporary moratorium on the project until the Hazardous Materials Safety Administration can update its safety regulations. They include automatic notifications for pipeline leaks and training for emergency first responders.

Bill Bodine, the Farm Bureau's director of business and regulatory affairs, said his group opposes another condition.

"They expressed concerns about the use of eminent domain for these projects and do not support the use of eminent domain," he said, "and then want to see the developers reaching willing agreements, making some progress in reaching those willing agreements before the pipeline portions of those projects are approved."

Landowners are not willing to give up their land so easily. In 2006, the Illinois General Assembly passed a bill to limit the takeover of private property for private development. However, critics of the legislation have claimed it included exceptions that undermine any benefits to property owners.

Two more pipeline proposals to connect Iowa and Illinois are also being reviewed by the Illinois Commerce Commission, the agency that oversees these projects.

The Hazardous Materials Safety Administration hopes to have its safety revisions completed this year. If this happens, Bodine said, the Farm Bureau would lift its support of a temporary moratorium. But he isn't sure whether these other pipeline projects are on state lawmakers' minds.

"Our legislative session in the state of Illinois begins again in January and usually runs through the end of May," he said. "So, we may see some action during that timeline associated with some of these issues."

Developers say any future pipelines would help farmers by boosting the ethanol industry. The state Agriculture Department has said Illinois uses 274 million bushels of corn to produce more ethanol than any other state.

3 awesome SMART ideas for holiday gifts this year

Photo: StatePoint

StatePoint Media - The holiday season is the perfect time of year to upgrade the kitchens of home chefs with the latest tech and tools. Here are three cool holiday gift ideas that will elevate the way your loved ones cook, host and clean up.

Smarter Composting

According to a recent report, the United States discards more food than any other country in the world, equating to 325 pounds of waste per person annually, with nearly half this waste generated in home kitchens. Whether you’re shopping for someone living in a region with mandatory composting or simply someone striving to be more sustainable at home, you can now gift them an effective solution to this issue.

While many people are aware of the environmental benefits of composting, such as reducing food waste, diverting trash from landfills and enriching garden soil, composting has also garnered a reputation for being time-consuming, messy and emitting unpleasant odors. Fortunately, new technology is addressing these challenges, making composting a convenient, clean and odor-free process for any household kitchen.

The THINKWARE BLUEVENT MUMU is the world’s first AI-powered smart food composter to use a new cutting-edge Metal Organic Framework (MOF) to block and inhibit the propagation of fungi to ensure clean and harmless use. Smart technology automatically measures food waste by weight then automates the disposal process accordingly. Additionally, AI storage automatically monitors food temperature and humidity to prevent spoilage. In summary, it eliminates the need for guesswork, leading to more successful composting. With a powerful, triple-activated carbon eco filter, this 4-liter capacity composter is odorless and whisper-quiet at just 20 decibels. It is now available at Amazon.com, Walmart.com, eBay.com, Newegg.com and Thinkwarestore.com.

Sparkling Water on Demand

One million plastic bottles are purchased every minute, according to Giving Compass. Unfortunately, the majority of them never get recycled. Help your loved one reduce their own contribution to this growing problem and bestow upon them an endless supply of carbonated beverages with a sparkling water maker. With a slim countertop profile, they’ll be able to transform tap water into seltzer in just few easy steps. This gift is great for mixologists who love to make and batch fizzy mocktails and cocktails for parties, as well as anyone with a thirst for reducing plastic waste.

Precision Cooking

Today’s kitchen scales don’t just simply weigh ingredients for precision cooking and baking, they also connect to smartphone apps for real-time nutritional analysis, recipe inspiration and instruction, and more. The best models ping the user’s device when they’ve added the correct amount of a given ingredient, easily toggle between different units of measurement, and allow users to save and share recipes via the app. This makes for a great gift for beginner cooks who want to get a feel for measurements, expert bakers looking for better results, those focused on portion control in the New Year, and anyone looking to optimize food prep.

By putting game-changing smart kitchen appliances at the top of your holiday shopping list, you can brighten the season for home chefs.

Guest Commentary | The world is facing the highest number of violent conflicts since WWII

by Sangita Bora
Guest Commentator

In the chronicles of human history, one unsettling truth remains unchanged: the world continues to be trapped in a vicious cycle of conflicts, disease, and disasters. Each one driving the other in a grim dance of misery where humanity is relentlessly caught in the events of self-inflicted suffering. Despite the scars of battles that run deep, we still lead ourselves in a world ravaged by conflicts, big and small, in almost every corner of the globe.

The world continues to witness heart-wrenching scenes from war-torn zones...

Earlier this year, in the 9250TH Meeting of the United Nations, Amina J. Mohammed, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, briefed that “Six out of seven people worldwide are plagued by feelings of insecurity, the world is facing the highest number of violent conflicts since the Second World War and 2 billion people — a quarter of humanity — live in places affected by such conflict.” A harrowing truth derived out of years of conflicts, fueled by greed, arrogance, and division along lines of race, religion, and ethnicity.

The world continues to witness heart-wrenching scenes from war-torn zones demonstrating how conflicts disrupt societies, displace populations, and leave behind the ruins of once-thriving communities. Meitei vs. Kuki-Zo conflict in Manipur, Russia vs. Ukraine, and Israel vs. Palestine, all show nothing but exemplify this destructive pattern. These conflicts across zones are creating fertile ground for the spread of disease, as healthcare systems crumble, sanitation deteriorates, and access to clean water becomes scarce.

While we have now let our guard down against COVID-19 pandemic which cost millions of lives, let's not rule out the possibility of another deadly pandemic breaching into our lives again. Because, "This will not be the last pandemic, nor the last global health emergency" said Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of the World Health Organization in a press release from October 1, 2020.

Amidst all eyes and talks currently on the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza, a stance observed in all other past crisis. The question we should be asking is, are we fated to react only after a situation has descended into complete chaos? Have we conveniently ignored the proverb - "Prevention is better than cure"? Sadly, yes and we have already laid the foundation for our extinction.

A world at war cannot hope to control the deteriorating state of the environment.

As humanity aspires for greatness while standing on a fragile foundation, another existential threat quietly looms: the environmental catastrophe. Many detrimental human acts add to it, and military operations during conflicts are one of them, leaving a profound ecological impact that extends beyond the mere emissions of greenhouse gases. The destruction wrought by warfare is multifaceted: from soil and water contamination, air pollution, toxic waste, nuclear hazards to ultimately contributing to climate change. In times of war, nature often becomes an unintended casualty, suffering grievous wounds that echo long after the guns fall silent.

A world at war cannot hope to control the deteriorating state of the environment. As nations grapple with disputes, territorial ambitions, and ideological conflicts, the health of our planet at large continues to deteriorate. "The era of global warming has ended, the era of global boiling has arrived", declared UN Chief António Guterres on 27 July. On September 14, 2023, NASA announced that Summer 2023 was the hottest on record. Record breaking climatic events have become the 'New Normal' for us. Question is until when? Doom looms upon us, ever nearer, as the day approaches when our survival will be at stake.

Breaking the world's persistent cycle of conflicts and crisis lies in a holistic approach where world leaders don't just talk the talk but walk the walk. This approach involves strengthening diplomacy and cooperation, conflict prevention and sustainable development to mitigate poverty and inequality. We are well behind schedule in realizing that our existence as a species hangs in the balance, dependent on the choices that we make today – choices that will either safeguard our world and humanity's legacy or jeopardize our very survival.

Sangita Bora, the nomadic wordsmith, hailing from the scenic landscapes of Assam whose quest for knowledge and opportunity keeps her on a perpetual journey, city to city, experience to experience. Currently in Delhi, thriving as a Senior Associate Technology at Publicis Groupe, where she combines her innovative spirit with her technical expertise. A passionate thinker and an aspiring writer, Sangita weaves her experiences and insights into thought-provoking narratives that resonate with readers from all walks of life.

Navigating solar leases for farmers and ranchers, a guide to working with developers

Leasing valuable farmland to solar energy firms can generate a reliable revenue stream. Landowners should carefully consider the current and future impact of long-term land leases.

Photo: American Public Power Association/Unsplash

by Cari Rincker
Attorney at Law

Solar energy projects present an attractive opportunity for landowners to diversify their income streams. When a solar energy developer approaches a farmer or rancher with a seemingly lucrative lease agreement, the landowner must carefully consider whether the lease adequately protects his or her best interests before rushing into the deal. In this article, I discuss the essential aspects of solar lease agreements, as well as any potential landfalls that farmers and ranchers should avoid when navigating and negotiating a solar lease agreement.

1. Understanding the Structure of the Agreement
Agreements between solar developers and landowners come in many shapes and forms. In broad strokes, there are two main approaches. On the one hand, a developer may present a farmer or rancher with an option agreement, which will give the developer a period of time to assess the viability of a solar project on the land, and the unilateral right to exercise an option to enter into a solar lease agreement if and when the developer determines that the project will be profitable.

The lease agreement should be fully negotiated at the time that the option agreement is executed. Alternatively, the developer may skip the option agreement and instead present the farmer or rancher with a lease agreement to be executed at the onset. Such a lease agreement usually commences with a development phase wherein the developer assesses the viability of the project. The developer is then granted the right to unilaterally terminate the lease at the conclusion of the development phase.

Regardless of whether there is a separate option agreement or a development phase incorporated into the lease, solar leases generally are structured pursuant to the same format: There is a construction period which may last roughly one year, followed by an operation period which may last decades, a renewal period which may extend the lease even longer, and ultimately, a cleanup period. As discussed further below, each distinct phase comes with specific rights, obligations, and compensation structures.

2. The Length of the Lease
To understand the extent to which a lease will tie up their land, a farmer or rancher should be sure to calculate the total timeframe of the encumbrance, from the beginning of the option or development phase, to the end of the cleanup period.

It is not uncommon for the life of a solar lease agreement to span more than half a century. For this reason, multi-generational family farms and ranches should carefully consider potential uses or plans for their land over the course of the near- and not-so-near-future. Such considerations may include the needs of future generations. The farmer or rancher should further keep in mind that such lease agreements typically run with the land, which means that they will bind any subsequent sale or estate succession of the land.

Given the length of the agreement, agriculture producers should also carefully assess the impact of a solar lease on their property, including a thorough evaluation of the potential environmental impact, the effect on overall farming or ranching productivity and economies of scale, and their eligibility for government programs.

3. Due Diligence on the Developer
If a farmer or rancher plans to enter a long-term relationship with a solar developer, they should perform due diligence on the developer to ensure that the developer is legitimate and has a good record with other landowners in the area. Due diligence may include: (i) checking the developer’s online presence, including reviews and BBB complaints, (ii) confirming the developer is a registered entity with the secretary of state for the state that they claim to be organized under, and (iii) paneling neighbors and the community to see if anyone else has negative experiences with the developer.

Braeson Holland/PEXELS

4. Authority to Enter into the Lease
Before executing an option or lease agreement, a farmer or rancher must confirm that he or she has the legal authority to enter into such an agreement. In the first instance, the landowner will likely have to warrant in the agreement that he or she is the fee simple owner of the farm or ranch. If there are multiple parties with an interest in the land, all co-owners must approve and be a party to the lease.

If the land is owned by a business entity or trust, then the governing documents of such entity or trust must be reviewed to confirm that they permit the execution of such a lease. Finally, if the property is subject to mortgages, pre-existing leases, easements, or other encumbrances on the property, those may need to be addressed before proceeding with a solar lease.

5. Compensation under the Lease
A farmer or rancher should carefully review the compensation he or she will receive under the option and/or lease agreement(s). At both the option/development phase and the construction phase, the landowner may receive either lump-sum payments or periodic per-acre payments. It is advisable to avoid lump-sum arrangements if the timeframe of either phase is highly variable. Construction phase payments should be higher than option or development phase payments.

The compensation received during the operation phase should be significantly higher than the earlier phases. It is most often structured as an annual or semi-annual payment tied to the number of acres subject to the lease. If receiving per acre payments, the farmer or rancher must clarify whether all acres will receive the same compensation level, or whether certain unused acres will be compensated at a lower rate (or not at all). Given the length of the operation phase, any lease should also include an escalation factor (typically between 1.5 and 3%) by which payments should rise on an annual basis to compensate for inflationary risk.

The farmer or rancher is also encouraged to negotiate other forms of compensation or reimbursement in the lease. For example, a landowner may ask for the reimbursement of professional expenses, such as attorneys’ fees, incurred in reviewing the lease. The farmer or rancher should confirm that the developer will be responsible for any tax increase caused by transforming farmland into a solar energy facility. They may also wish to explore whether the developer will compensate the landowner for any loss of eligibility for government farming programs. Finally, the farmer or rancher should ensure that the lease clearly delineates a compensation structure for damages incurred to crops and the underlying drainage system on or adjacent to the property.

6. The Rights and Obligations of Each Party
The option and lease agreements should clearly lay out the rights granted to the solar developer on the landowner’s land. The farmer or rancher must pay careful attention to how the lease will affect their rights on the land subject to the lease and ensure that any rights or easements granted are carefully tailored for reasonableness. They should also understand whether the lease will interfere with rights on adjacent land owned by them.

Photo: Tornike Jibladze/Pixabay

For example, a solar lease will grant the developer an easement for solar access, which may permit the developer to remove trees or other improvements on adjacent land if they obstruct access to sunlight. Because leases cannot possibly address all uses of the land, I always advise that a farmer or rancher ask for the inclusion of a catch-all reservation of rights clause, wherein the lease specifies that any rights not explicitly granted to the developer are reserved by the landowner.

7. Termination and Cleanup Obligations
It is common for leases to have asymmetrical termination provisions, meaning that a developer can often terminate the lease at any time and for any reason, while a landowner can only do so in the event of a breach of a monetary obligation. A farmer or rancher may nevertheless seek to ensure that they may still request damages or specific performance of certain provisions of the lease where they are not permitted to terminate the lease.

A lease should contain robust cleanup obligations for the developer, including cleanup of any debris post-construction, as well as restoring the property to its original condition at the end of the lease agreement. Local or state regulations may be of use in this regard. For example, in Illinois, the Department of Agriculture requires that any developer with a solar lease agreement with a landowner must also enter into an Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement with the Bureau of Land and Water Resources, which contains standardized construction and cleanup obligations for the project.

8. Disputes
On a final note, farmers and ranchers should always plan for the worst-case scenario. This involves ensuring that any dispute arrangements or requirements contained in the lease favor the landowner. In particular, a farmer or rancher should request that any waiver of a right to a jury trial be removed from a lease. Moreover, if a lease contains provisions waiving any right to appeal an arbitration or other dispute award, that language should also be struck from the agreement.

In closing, solar lease agreements are binding contracts of long duration, with potentially significant consequences for the landowner and his or her heirs or assigns. Given the variable and complexities addressed in this article, it is advisable that the landowner hire an attorney to help ensure that the solar lease agreement is carefully tailored to the unique concerns and needs of a farmer or rancher.

Whether an attorney is employed, or whether the landowner takes it upon him- or herself to review the agreement, the reviewing party should ensure that they have adequately considered each of the issues discussed herein.

About the author

Cari Rincker is the owner of Rincker Law, PLLC, a national general practice law firm concentrating in food and agriculture law with offices in New York and Illinois. She has her boots planted firmly in agriculture – she presently own a small farm in Shelbyville, Illinois, and enjoys judging livestock shows around the country.