Agenda - Environmental Policy Board - 08/19/2019

Home

4. Minnesota is the only state (or one of the only) that does General Obligation bonding for closed landfills, which may threaten the bonding status of the site if used for a separate, private purpose, such as solar development. New England, on the other hand, is developing large closed landfills with solar and serving the load of adjacent towns and cities with streamlined permitting and other approval processes, with access to private Superfund PRP funding 5. With the entry of Freeway Landfill into the Closed Landfill Program there are now 110 closed landfills in the program. There are 4 more facilities that are eligible but have not yet entered the program, enhancing a significant market opportunity in Minnesota for renewable reuse 6. Only about half of the 110 landfills are constrained by the use of state General Obligation bonds, but data is lacking on which portion of each site is GO bond restricted, and what percentage of the land coverage of each site is GO bonded 7. PCA is restricted by its funding and resources to develop solar on its "settled" closed landfills, despite interest in this effort 8. PCA is concerned about cap intrusion risks from developing solar, but it is interested in exploring this topic further and also on working on the "buffer" areas (in comparison to an entire site, the buffer may not be a significant area of land on which to develop solar or mitigate the impact of methane emissions from its landfills) 9. Many of the state's closed landfills fall under Rural Electric Cooperative service territory where there are many more financial barriers to the solar PV market as a whole: 1. less technical, financial, legal, and mechanical experience with utility -scale solar photovoltaic (PV) development; 2. less risk tolerance in general; 3. less staff and financial capacity to execute the necessary analysis to host utility -scale solar PV projects 10. Lack of education in the state of the potential for beneficial use of these properties with solar 11. Lack of education across the state's offices and agencies on the financial mechanisms by which solar PV can be and does get developed in Minnesota 12. Environmental insurance costs, uncertain permitting processes and delays, and ongoing operating and maintenance engineering work drives up the cost of developing PV on these sites and creates a market barrier 13. Individual counties and local government processes may not be streamlined and/or amenable to getting a PV project done on a PCA closed landfill site. This includes general attitudes in local or state offices that vary in enthusiasm toward this effort 14. The dumps in Minnesota - outside of PCA's Closed Landfill Program -- are not all owned by the state, and complex private land transactions and uncompleted site assessments may be required to proceed to develop solar on the sites 4