Introduction
Industrial solar development has grown substantially in recent years, driven by aggressive state and federal mandates, subsidies, and other incentives.[1] In 2024 alone, the U.S. solar industry installed nearly 50 gigawatts of new capacity—a 23 percent increase over 2023—with industrial solar accounting for more than 80 percent of that growth. Unlike residential solar, which is typically installed on rooftops for private consumption, industrial solar entails massive, ground-mounted installations designed to generate electricity for the grid. These projects are promoted by climate activists and policymakers as essential to combatting climate change. However, industrial solar imposes steep economic, environmental, and social costs that are often hidden or externalized, which far outweigh the supposed benefits associated with industrial solar.
The Problems
From problems including the destruction of farmland and natural habitat to electric grid destabilization and increased costs to consumers, the expansion of industrial solar power is far from impact-free.[2]
- Land Use and Loss of Farmland
Industrial solar projects require massive tracts of land to operate. A conservative estimate places the amount of land needed at 10 acres per megawatt of electricity produced, but broader analyses that include mining, disposal, and transmission infrastructure suggest the true figure is closer to 43.5 acres per megawatt. This makes solar vastly more land-intensive than coal, natural gas, or nuclear, each of which requires just 12–13 acres per megawatt. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, achieving state and federal renewable goals would require 5.7 million acres by 2035 and 10 million acres by 2050—equivalent to half a percent of the entire contiguous United States.
Due to the scale of land needed, most industrial solar projects are sited on agricultural property. This is particularly attractive to landowners, as solar companies offer lease payments well above standard farming or grazing rates. The U.S. Department of Agriculture found that 70 percent of industrial solar development between 2009 and 2020 took place on cropland or rangeland, and the American Farmland Trust projects that 83 percent of new solar will likewise occupy agricultural areas. Nearly half will cover land classified as the most productive, versatile, and resilient for farming. Once transformed into a solar facility, this land is generally removed from food production for decades. Even though co-location with agriculture is possible in theory, it is exceedingly rare in practice. In Iowa, the state’s largest solar plant occupies about 1,000 acres that once grew corn and soybeans—90 percent of which is now entirely solar-covered and agriculturally inactive.
To continue reading, click here.
[1] This Policy Tip Sheet draws entirely from a larger Policy Study by The Heartland Institute. For the full Policy Study, including comprehensive citations that are not included in this Tip Sheet, see: Jack McPherrin & H. Sterling Burnett, “How States Can Push Back Against the Destructive Expansion of Industrial Solar Power,” The Heartland Institute, Policy Study, April 15, 2025, https://heartland.org/publications/how-states-can-push-back-against-the-destructive-expansion-of-industrial-solar-power/
[2] More discussion of each of these five overarching problems can be found in the larger Policy Study, including direct citations.
Jack McPherrin is a Research Fellow for the Glenn C. Haskins Emerging Issues Center at The Heartland Institute, and also serves as Heartland’s research editor.
H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., is the Director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy and the managing editor of Environment & Climate News.
