Prime agriculture and solar energy can coexist, but not in Ontario

Ontario's recent decision to ban ground-mounted solar farms on prime agricultural land has sparked a debate over whether agriculture and solar energy can coexist.

The Ford government argues that the ban is necessary to protect the province's valuable farmland, but experts caution that it may hinder innovative approaches like agrivoltaics, which combines crop production with solar energy generation.

Joshua Pearce, Western University’s John M. Thompson Chair in Information Technology and Innovation, contends that this ban could disadvantage Ontario's farmers compared to those in other regions where agrivoltaics is being rapidly adopted.

Pearce explains that agrivoltaics creates a microclimate around and beneath the solar panels that helps conserve water and protect crops. This system not only provides farmers with profitable land leases from solar operators but also enhances crop yields.

"It’s baffling that the province would prohibit this method," Pearce said. "Who wants to tell farmers they can’t install a solar system that increases food production, boosts their agricultural income, and provides stable annual income from land leases for 25 years? When farmers see the data, I think they’ll be frustrated."

However, some Canadian farmers, concerned about the encroachment of industrial uses on farmland, are skeptical. They fear that allowing solar installations on agricultural land could lead to further loss of farmland, as farmers might be tempted to prioritize the more lucrative solar leases over traditional farming.

Critics question whether farmers would continue cultivating crops if they could earn more from solar installations alone.

While acknowledging the benefits of agrivoltaics in certain scenarios, Drew Spoelstra, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture (OFA), supports the government’s recent ban, which was announced as part of its energy procurement plan.

Spoelstra emphasizes the importance of preserving farmland, noting, "We continue to lose over 300 acres of productive farmland every day, and this announcement is a step in the right direction to slow that loss.

The OFA supports protecting our most valuable food-producing lands for their primary use: producing over 200 different agricultural products to feed Canadians and people worldwide."

The ban, however, restricts diversification opportunities for farmers, according to Patrick Gossage, founding director and president of Agrivoltaics Canada. "We don’t dictate what crops farmers should grow.

They should have the freedom to choose," Gossage said. "With the cost of solar energy dropping, we can now design projects that optimize land use for both solar energy and agriculture."

Agrivoltaics Canada estimates that leasing land for agrivoltaics can be up to four times more profitable than traditional farming leases. While Ontario is taking a cautious stance on solar development on agricultural land, other countries are moving forward with the technology.

The United States, for instance, has made significant investments in agrivoltaics, with multimillion-dollar grants supporting large-scale systems nationwide. Europe and Asia are also rapidly expanding their agrivoltaics markets.

The debate over Ontario's recent ban on ground-mounted solar farms on prime agricultural land highlights significant concerns and differing perspectives on balancing agricultural preservation with renewable energy development.

While the Ford government argues that the ban is necessary to protect the province's limited supply of prime farmland—only about five percent of Ontario's farmland is classified as prime—critics warn that this decision could stifle innovative solutions like agrivoltaics, which combines crop production with solar energy generation.

Drew Spoelstra, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture (OFA), acknowledges the potential of agrivoltaics to diversify agricultural operations, particularly for livestock producers.

However, he expresses concerns about the long-term sustainability of such practices. Spoelstra fears that without strict regulations, prime farmland could eventually be converted entirely into solar farms, compromising its agricultural function.

He emphasizes that Ontario's limited farmland requires careful management, especially compared to countries like the U.S., which have more abundant agricultural land.

On the other hand, research conducted in 2023 by Western University and Dalhousie University suggests that agrivoltaics could help maintain food production while supporting Canada’s goal of achieving 90 percent non-emitting electricity by 2030.

The research highlights the benefits of growing certain crops, such as leafy greens, herbs, and root vegetables, under solar panels. These crops thrive in the partial shade provided by the panels, which helps conserve water, reduce heat stress, and protect plants from extreme weather.

This dual-use approach could enhance yields for crops like basil, broccoli, and tomatoes while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Advocates like Mike Carter, founding partner of First Green Energy, argue that the provincial ban signals a preference for natural gas over renewable solutions. They point out that Ontario’s electricity is currently produced mainly from nuclear power, with solar energy accounting for less than one percent of the total energy output.

Environmental advocates are urging the Ford government to phase out gas power by 2035 by tripling wind and solar energy and investing in energy efficiency and storage. They argue that agrivoltaics could play a crucial role in expanding Ontario’s renewable power sources.

Citing successful models like Texas, where solar grazing has significantly increased sheep flocks, Patrick Gossage, founding director and president of Agrivoltaics Canada, believes Ontario could reduce its dependence on imported sheep by adopting similar practices.

He notes that agrivoltaics can also reduce soil erosion, reverse desertification, increase agricultural employment, and enhance local food production, providing additional revenue streams for farmers.

Gossage and other advocates argue that while restricting solar development on prime agricultural land might have been justifiable a decade ago, the situation has changed. Solar energy is now the cheapest form of new generation, and agrivoltaics offers a low-cost, rapidly deployable, and low-risk solution for Ontario's energy needs.

As pressure mounts for viable renewable energy solutions, critics warn that the Ford government’s decision could hinder Ontario’s ability to meet its renewable energy targets and miss a significant opportunity to advance clean energy goals.

Pearce suggests that the government's decision reflects a lack of awareness about the benefits of agrivoltaics, a technology still in its early stages in Canada. He argues that agrivoltaics could help reduce food prices while contributing to net-zero emissions, presenting a missed opportunity for Ontario to lead in sustainable energy development.