What’s at stake with solar cases heard by Ohio Supreme Court

Public Utilities
Webp court
Ohio Supreme Court | Ohio Supreme Court

Solar generation facilities have swamped the Ohio electric grid in recent years. Six facilities have already been built, with another 37 approved by the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB).

The influx of solar is increasing concerns about grid reliability in Ohio and the other 12 states in which the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM) manages all or part of the grid. 

“As energy demands grow, it creates a problem for PJM,” reported CenterSquare.

“PJM expects demand to increase significantly by 2040, but the power supply is becoming more intermittent as solar projects dominate the queue to get plugged into the grid.” 

Two cases before the Ohio Supreme Court may affect how much more solar generation comes online in Ohio. 

Applications for new facilities from Birch Solar and Kingwood Solar were both rejected by the OPSB. Birch Solar would have been built about 10 miles southwest of Lima, and Kingwood Solar had been proposed for Greene County. Both were rejected because local opposition led the OPSB to determine they were not in the “public interest,” one of the eight criteria a facility must meet before it can be approved. 

Both companies appealed the rejections to the Supreme Court and made similar arguments centering on the OPSB’s rejection of the applications based on the public interest requirements of Ohio law. 

Birch Solar complained the OPSB “made it a popularity contest” by relying on public sentiment expressed by citizens and local governments. The company claimed that because the OPSB “felt that the perceived local government opposition to the project did not serve the public interest” it “violate[ed] Ohio public policy, Ohio’s Constitutional non-delegation doctrine, and multiple Ohio laws.”

Kingwood Solar also disparaged the positions of local governments. 

“The vague opinions and unfounded statements of Greene County and the three townships cannot outweigh this significant evidence in the record,” the company stated in its brief. 

How the Supreme Court rules on these cases will affect more than Birch Solar and Kingwood Solar. There are currently 10 other solar generators with applications before the OPSB, including Stark Solar and Frasier Solar. For both of these applications, and in several others, local opposition to the projects appears to be the only way they might be rejected. 

One example of this is Frasier Solar. According to Scott Adair, the company’s project lead, “Of the 896 comments submitted by Knox County residents, 345 comments (39%) were in support of the Project, while 551 comments (61%) expressed opposition to the Project.” 

The cases for Birch Solar and Kingwood Solar have been before the Supreme Court since late last year. Oral arguments have not been scheduled in either case, which means it will likely be at least several months before the Court issues a decision in either case.