Sheep and Solar Panels: Using Solar Sites for Pastureland

Ad Crable, Bay Journal • August 16, 2022


A solar power boom generated by new renewable energy mandates is unfurling in the Chesapeake Bay region. Virginia, for example, was ninth in the nation for new solar capacity in 2021.

 

With many solar arrays ending up on farmland, a movement is fast taking hold to make sure that they will benefit the environment, agriculture and wildlife, and not just create a sea of silicon.

 

Allowing sheep to graze among solar panels has become one attractive antidote.

 

Grazing by sheep and other livestock joins other dual uses: planting groundcover to benefit pollinators, growing marketable plants such as cherry tomatoes and lavender under the panels, installing beehives and maximizing soil health practices to improve the land for later ag use. Projects that combine farming and solar energy are called agrivoltaic.

 

State agencies in Virginia, Maryland, and New York have all created pollinator-friendly scorecards for solar developers, underscoring the expectation that environmentally beneficial groundcover will become the norm on both rural and urban solar farms.

 

“Solar [arrays] on farmland should be required to be dual use,” said Arjun Makhijani, founder of the Maryland-based Institute for Energy and Environmental Research.

 

The use of solar sites for livestock grazing is still in its infancy, but flocks of sheep are already grazing contentedly under and around glass panels in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and New York.

 

By welcoming the grazers, solar operators save money on land maintenance. After the cost of leasing the land, vegetation management is often their top expense.

 

Sheep owners get access to new grazing pastures while receiving payments to boot, adding precious income at a time when many farmers are struggling. Studies find that sheep farmers often are paid $300–$500 an acre.

 

There are environmental benefits as well. For example, a new study funded by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory found that native vegetation munched on by sheep shows an uptick in carbon capture and improves the soil by increasing the cycling of nutrients, carbon and water.

 

The synergies of grazing and leaving the ground undisturbed can actually improve a farm’s soil during its use as a solar site, according to a study by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, based on solar projects on three Maryland farms. Farmers want and financially need the opportunity, the study said.

 

Why are sheep the most popular choice, at least for now? Because most solar arrays are too close to the ground to accommodate cattle. A solar project being built in Howard County, Md., though, has panels 6 feet off the ground so cows can graze on hay planted underneath. Goats tend to eat wiring and jump onto the panels. Pigs wallow.

 

Sheep, on the other hand, fit nicely under the panels, typically built two to three feet off the ground, and they keep their heads down for the business at hand. The panels provide shelter and shade. Studies are also finding that vegetation planted for grazing under solar panels helps keep the panels cool, boosting energy production.

 

“Normally, we hired crews with lawn mowers and weed wackers. For a solar business focused on sustainability, the idea of using fossil-fuel equipment is counterintuitive,” said Keith Hevenor of Nexamp Inc., one of the largest solar developers in the nation. The New Jersey-based company has sheep grazing at 14 sites in New York and may double that total by the end of the year.

 

“It’s been a great fit for us,” he said.

 

And then there are the optics. At some sites, solar grazing has blunted the concerns of those rattled by the conversion of farmland to energy production. Twenty states have sheep grazing on solar sites.

 

It seems too good to be true. But it’s not, said New York sheep farmer Lexie Hain, who helped form the grassroots American Solar Grazing Association in 2018 to connect and mobilize sheep farmers and solar operators around the country.

 

“Sheep are the natural fit for solar. It’s creating a shift,” Hain said. “This is a land-use change as well as a business opportunity for people, and they are responding. Solar grazing is happening on its own because it works better than mechanical mowing. It’s kind of remarkable.”

 

She and her nonprofit are being flooded with requests for advice and have helped launch grazing at solar arrays in Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York and other states. Hain and a business partner graze 1,400 of their own sheep at eight solar sites in New York and Pennsylvania.

 

The growing interest has already prompted a seed mix specially designed for solar grazing by sheep. Fuzz & Buzz by Pennsylvania-based Ernst Conservation Seeds combines various nutritious grasses favored by sheep with blooming plants that draw pollinators and improve soil health.

 

Fat as butterballs

 

In the spring of 2020, John Fisher and his son, who are Amish sheep farmers near Gettysburg, PA, turned loose 100 lambs inside the newly opened 130-acre Nittany 1 solar array erected by Lightsource BP on former farmland.

 

“Those lambs gained weight like crazy, more than sheep ever gained on our pastures,” Fisher said.

 

Things went so well that this past season the brothers have increased the number of sheep they grow for meat on the property to 480. To keep from overgrazing the ground bare, the sheep are rotated into new areas of the property every few days with moveable fences.

 

The best grazing was under the solar panels themselves, he said. Studies have shown that “microclimates” of heat and moisture develop under panels, providing ideal growing areas for an assortment of vegetables, berries and marketable niche plants such as saffron.

 

“I couldn’t have found a better pasture for my sheep, in all honesty,” Fisher said when asked if he was satisfied with the grazing arrangement. Coreopsis, goldenrod, ox-eyed daisies, milkweed and other flowering plants added to the mix to benefit bees and other pollinators had “blooms all over the place,” the grazier reported.

 

About 100 miles east, near Sunbury and the Susquehanna River, grazier Caroline Owens lets 40 sheep she raises for meat, wool and public education fatten up on a 14-acre solar array. The panels there power 30% of the surrounding campus of Susquehanna University. The college initiated the grazing venture with her three years ago. Now, the sheep share the site with a beehive and communal gardens for students.

 

“They have everything they need. They’re butterball fat,” she said.

 

Are there enough sheep to do the job?

 

With the accelerating interest in solar grazing, the question may soon be if there are enough sheep to go around.

 

On average, it takes about one to five sheep per acre to keep plant growth trimmed.

 

In Virginia, where an estimated 7,500 to 35,000 acres will be needed for solar projects to meet the state’s goal of 50% renewable energy by 2020, there are 72,000 sheep. Approximately 417 solar projects are awaiting approval from PJM Interconnection, the nation’s largest electric grid operator. At the upper end of the estimated need for solar acres, there would not be enough sheep to cover that ground.

 

Pennsylvania has about 96,000 sheep, according to the National Agricultural Statistics Service. Under Gov. Tom Wolf’s 2019 executive order to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, some estimates say 80,000 acres of solar arrays will be needed in the next eight years. Approximately 437 solar projects are awaiting review by PJM Interconnection, a majority on open land. Pennsylvania would have a deficit of sheep unless only one or two sheep are needed to keep grasses shorn.

 

In Maryland, the state had mandated that 14.5% of its energy come from solar sources by 2030 — triple the amount installed now. That was before the Climate Solutions Now Act became law this spring, speeding up the targeted rate of greenhouse gas reductions. Under the former law, a governor’s task force estimated that 7,766 to 33,033 acres of farmland would be needed to meet the goal. Currently, there are an estimated 23,400 sheep on 925 farms of various sizes. That would not be enough sheep to handle the upper estimate of needed solar acres.

 

“I think there’s a lot of interest [in solar grazing] in Maryland. I’m not certain we have enough sheep,” said Susan Schoenian, a sheep and goat specialist at the University of Maryland’s Western Maryland Research and Education Center.

 

New York, which has one of the most ambitious clean-energy goals in the nation, has 80,000 sheep.

 

Challenges include transportation to distant solar sites and lack of awareness of solar grazing opportunities. That’s why Todd Schmidt is working on a three-year study, funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Schmidt’s own Cornell University, for ways to increase solar grazing in Pennsylvania, New York and other mid-Atlantic and New England states.

 

Sheep farmers forming cooperatives that can buy and share transportation — even marketing sheep meat as “produced under solar arrays” — are among the ideas to increase the sheep-solar connection.

 

“I think from a policy standpoint, there is considerable interest from state legislatures that this needs to be considered,” Schmidt said.

 

Hain and others said that they believe the demand for solar grazing create growth in the sheep industry. Plus, the relatively low costs of starting a sheep farm is attractive to entry-level participation by young and beginning farmers, as well as people of color.

 

“Sheep farming in the United States hasn’t really taken off because it hasn’t been a profitable venture,” said Caleb Scott, a New York sheep farmer and vice president of the American Solar Grazing Association. “But now, with the opportunity to provide a service through feeding your sheep, it’s increasingly making sheep farming maybe one of the most profitable animal husbandry markets that’s scalable.”

 

A workable tradeoff?

 

Despite its multiple benefits, sheep grazing among solar fields has not been universally embraced and is seen by some as enabling the conversion of prime farmland to energy production. Some think solar belongs only or primarily on rooftops, parking lots, abandoned mine land and industrial or commercial sites.

 

Especially where prime soil is taken out of production, some groups don’t want to see farmland converted into industrial energy sites, even if theoretically the land can resume agricultural use, on healthier soil, after solar contracts end, typically in 25 years.

 

Roughly 61% of solar arrays built on Virginia farmland so far have been on the highest-rated soil, according to a study by Aaron Berryhill of Virginia Commonwealth University.

 

“The scale and pace at which this is happening means reasonable mitigation measures need to be strengthened,” said Ethan Winter, the American Farmland Trust’s northeast solar specialist.

 

While solidly endorsing solar energy, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation says solar arrays should avoid prime farmland and the removal of trees. A planned 7-acre community solar project on the foundation’s Clagett Farm in Maryland will incorporate an existing herd of sheep for vegetation management and to increase the herd size.

 

Grazing may not address all concerns, but it is playing a role in handling the increasing pressure for multiple benefits from solar sites.

 

“It doesn’t necessarily solve the problem of prime farmland going into solar developments and loss of farmland,” Schmidt said. “But maybe it’s a middle-ground strategy.”

 

 

Ad Crable is a Bay Journal staff writer based in Pennsylvania.

 

This article was originally published in the Bay Journal, a non-profit news source that provides the public with independent reporting on environmental news and issues in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

 

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

By Friends of Eastern Neck Board of Directors April 16, 2025
Let your elected representatives and business and cultural leaders know that our Refuge and others like it all over the country deserve to be protected. They deserve our stewardship for the natural wonders they shelter, and because they provide refuge for people, too.
By Elaine McNeil April 9, 2025
The Budget Deficit In a recent debate on closing Maryland’s budget deficit, Minority Leader Jason Buckel, a Republican delegate from Allegany County, made an important point: “The man upstairs has only been there for two, three years. I don’t blame him for our economic failures of the last 10,” referring to Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, who was elected in 2022. Ahead of the 2026 gubernatorial elections, Buckel’s comments highlight a key reality that many of his Republican colleagues seldom admit: It isn’t right to blame Gov. Moore for a budget deficit that has been brewing for years. Now projected at $3.3 billion, Maryland’s structural deficit is a problem that started long before Moore took office. In fact, it was first projected in 2017, during the tenure of former GOP Gov. Larry Hogan. This isn’t an opinion — it’s a fact that Buckel and other lawmakers, including Republican Del. Jefferson Ghrist, have bravely acknowledged. During that same debate, Ghrist remarked that the Department of Legislative Services had warned about this deficit throughout Hogan’s administration, yet he did little to address it. Ghrist pointed out that during Maryland’s “good years,” when the state received a flood of federal covid-19 relief dollars, spending spiraled without regard for long-term fiscal health. Hogan used these one-time federal funds to support ongoing programs, which masked the true state of Maryland’s finances and created an illusion of fiscal stability. Hogan continues to take credit for the “surplus” Maryland had in 2022 — even though experts repeatedly note it was caused by the influx of federal dollars during the pandemic. As Ghrist correctly observed, the lack of fiscal restraint and slow growth during the Hogan years laid the groundwork for the $3.3 billion structural deficit the state faces today. Indeed, Maryland’s economy has been stagnant since 2017, especially in comparison to its neighboring states, well before Moore took office. Compounding these challenges are President Donald Trump’s reckless layoffs and trade wars with our allies. Thousands of federal workers who live in Maryland are losing their jobs, which will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue. Trump’s tariffs will also put an enormous strain on local businesses, including Eastern Shore farmers, who are now subject to up to 15% retaliatory tariffs on chicken, wheat, soybeans, corn, fruits, and vegetables. FY2026 Budget Considering this grim reality, Maryland’s lawmakers are making difficult, but necessary, decisions to shore up the state’s finances. Gov. Moore and state legislative leaders recently agreed to a budget that prioritizes expanding Maryland’s economy without raising taxes on most residents. In fact, 94% of Marylanders should see either a tax cut or no change at all to their income tax bill under the proposed agreement. Lawmakers also plan to cut government spending by the largest amount in 16 years, while at the same time making targeted investments in emerging industries, such as quantum computing and aerospace defense, so the state is less dependent on federal jobs. While the richest Marylanders might see their income taxes go up, it’s reasonable to ask someone making over $750,000 a year to pay $1,800 more to support law enforcement, strengthen our schools, and grow our economy. As for the proposed tax on data and IT services, these products aren’t subject to Maryland’s sales tax under current law. Maryland leaders want to modernize our tax code by levying a 3% sales tax on these products. Because they don’t raise income taxes on the majority of Marylanders and because state leaders are also cutting spending by billions, these ideas are fair. They’re also necessary after Gov. Hogan chose to kick the can down the road instead of addressing Maryland’s long-predicted deficit and now that Trump’s policies will lay off thousands of Marylanders and his tariffs will hurt our state. By making responsible choices now, Maryland leaders are putting the state on a path to long-term economic stability. Their decisions will help Maryland thrive, create jobs, and invest in the vital services that every resident relies on — without burdening hardworking families. I’m confident Maryland will emerge stronger, more resilient, and ready to lead in the industries of tomorrow. Elaine McNeil is chair of the Queen Anne’s Democratic Central Committee.
By John Christie April 2, 2025
Among Donald Trump’s most recent targets is what he calls “rogue law firms.” At 6pm last Thursday, March 27, he issued an Executive Order (EO) aimed at my old law firm, WilmerHale, as one of those “rogue” firms. Approximately 15 hours later, the firm filed a 63-page complaint challenging the EO on multiple constitutional grounds. The EO is an “unprecedented assault on the bedrock principle that one should not be penalized for merely defending or prosecuting a lawsuit” and constitutes an “undisguised form of retaliation for representing clients and causes Trump disfavors.” And by 8pm on Friday, March 28, a little over 24 hours after the EO was first issued, a federal district court judge in Washington granted a request for a temporary restraining order, blocking key provisions of the EO from taking effect for now. In doing so, the Court found that “the retaliatory nature of the EO is clear from its face. There is no doubt that it chills speech and legal advocacy and qualifies as a constitutional harm.” The Executive Order The EO and a so-called “Fact Sheet” that went with it recites that the Administration is committed to addressing the significant risks associated with law firms, particularly so-called “Big Law” firms that engage in conduct detrimental to critical American interests. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale) is yet another law firm said to have abandoned the legal profession’s highest ideals and abused its pro bono practice by engaging in activities that “undermine justice and the interests of the United States.” The specific examples offered in support of this conclusion: The EO asserts that WilmerHale “engages in obvious partisan representations to achieve political ends,” an apparent reference to the firm’s representation of Trump’s political opponents — namely the Democratic National Committee and the presidential campaigns of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The EO cites WilmerHale’s “egregious conduct” in “supporting efforts to discriminate on the basis of race,” an apparent reference to the firm’s representation of Harvard in the Students for Fair Admissions litigation. The EO accuses WilmerHale of “backing the obstruction of efforts to prevent illegal aliens from committing horrific crimes,” an apparent reference to the firm’s litigation related pro bono practice and successful challenges to immigration related policies. The EO accuses WilmerHale of “furthering the degradation of the quality of American elections,” an apparent reference to the film’s involvement in challenges to restrictive state voter-identification and voter-registration laws. The EO singles out certain current and former WilmerHale partners, including Robert Mueller, for special criticism by describing Mr. Mueller’s investigation as “one of the most partisan investigations in American history” and having “weaponized the prosecutorial power to suspend the democratic process and distort justice.” The EO then Revokes security clearances held by WilmerHale attorneys; Prohibits the federal government from hiring WilmerHale employees absent a special waiver; Orders a review and the possible termination of federal contracts with entities that do business with the firm; Calls for the withdrawal of government goods or services from the firm; and Calls for restrictions on the ability of WilmerHale employees to enter federal buildings (presumably including federal courthouses) and on their “engaging” with government employees. WilmerHale’s Complaint WilmerHale engaged Paul Clement, a former Solicitor General during the George W. Bush administration and a well-known advocate frequently representing conservative causes, to represent the firm in this matter. Assisted by some 15 WilmerHale litigators, the complaint names the Executive Office of the President and 48 other Departments, Commissions, and individual Officers in their official capacity as defendants. A variety of constitutional violations are alleged: The First Amendment protects the rights of WilmerHale and its clients to speak freely, and petition the courts and other government institutions without facing retaliation and discrimination by federal officials. The separation of powers limits the President’s role to enforcing the law and no statute or constitutional provision empowers him to unilaterally sanction WilmerHale in this manner. The EO flagrantly violates due process by imposing severe consequences without notice or an opportunity to be heard. The EO violates the right to counsel protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and imposes unconstitutional conditions on federal contracts and expenditures. The complaint alleges that WilmerHale has already suffered irreparable damage in the 16 hours since the EO issued. The firm has been vilified by the most powerful person in the country as a “rogue law firm” that has “engaged in conduct detrimental to critical American interests. The EO will inevitable cause extensive, lasting damage to WilmerHale’s current and future business prospects. The harm to the firm’s reputation will negatively affect its ability to recruit and retain employees. Further Proceedings Temporary restraining orders constitute emergency relief upon a showing of likely success on the merits and irreparable harm were the temporary relief not entered. A later hearing will be held in order for the judge to determine whether a preliminary injunction should be issued preventing the government from executing the EO during the continued length of the litigation. Editorial Note: In light of the recent capitulation of several “Big Law” firms to the unreasonable and unconstitutional attacks by the Trump administration, WilmerHale is providing a blueprint for resistance as it fights back. More law firms need to be inspired by WilmerHale’s response to Trump’s demand for revenge on his so-called political enemies. John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
By Bill Flook & CSES Staff April 2, 2025
Tom Timberman was one of the founders of Common Sense for the Eastern Shore. Sadly, he died last month. He will be missed. Common Sense exists because of his leadership and inspiration. His vision was to provide factual and timely commentary and analysis on topics that concern people who live and work on Maryland's Eastern Shore, and to provide factual reporting to help readers shape their own lives. It was important to Tom, as it is today to the editorial board, for Common Sense to help voters to be aware of the effects — personal and local — of decisions made at the federal and state levels. Especially relevant now is this from our Mission Statement: “We seek an America responsive to its citizens and its constitution.” We reprint this tribute from Bill Flook, President of the Democratic Club of Kent County : Many of us were deeply saddened to learn of TomTimberman’s passing last week. It’s hard to believe that such a strong Democratic voice is gone. I worked with Tom for much of the past decade on many good projects promoting our values and activities, including helping on his campaign for County Commissioner, and I’ll particularly miss following his lead as Captain of the Dawn Patrol. Our group met most Saturday mornings for coffee and some good chat, before heading up to Dems HQ to set up the booth there. We’ll miss you, Tom!
By Jared Schablein April 2, 2025
After over 12 hours of debate over two days (and a whole circus from the other side), the Maryland House of Delegates has passed HB 350, this year's state budget, and sent it to the State Senate. This budget is a deal between House Democrats, Senate Democrats, and Governor Wes Moore. It faces our state's $3 billion deficit head-on not with fantasy math, but with real choices: smart cuts and fair new revenue. This is what grown-up governing looks like. How We Got Here: Maryland’s budget problems didn’t start overnight. Leaders began warning about a shortfall in 2017 when Governor Larry Hogan was in office. Hogan made our state budget bigger every year, but the legislature wasn’t allowed to move money around or make common-sense changes. By law, they could only make cuts. In 2020, Maryland voters changed that. Starting in 2023, lawmakers finally got full power to shape the budget, not just cut from it. Instead of fixing the problem, Governor Hogan used federal COVID relief to hide our fiscal instability. Then, before leaving office, he drained our state’s savings from $5.5 billion to $2.3 billion to boost his image. Today, we are facing a new fiscal arsonist. Donald Trump’s trade wars and cuts to federal programs hit Maryland hard. We have more federal jobs and agencies than any other state, so we felt it worse than most. A University of Maryland study says Trump’s tariffs alone could cost us $2 billion. Trump/Musk's policies caused over 30,000 people in Maryland to lose their jobs, offices to shut down, and promised investments to disappear. These federal cuts added another $300 million to our budget deficit. COVID relief gave us a short break and even created a fake surplus under Hogan, but that money is gone now. Meanwhile, housing, healthcare, and college prices have gone way up. The Trump–Musk White House is making it worse by cutting even more funding, eliminating research, and gutting the services we rely on. That’s why Maryland had to act. We needed a real plan to protect working people, fund our schools and hospitals, and keep our state strong. Why Cuts Were Needed Trump’s trade wars and cuts to federal agencies hit Maryland harder than any other state. A University of Maryland study says those tariffs alone could cost us $2 billion. That hurts real people: A chicken farmer on the Eastern Shore is paying 25% more for fertilizer. A dock worker in Baltimore has fewer ships to unload. A restaurant owner in Western Maryland can’t afford eggs and tomatoes. We’ve lost over 30,000 jobs. Offices have shut down. Promised investments disappeared. The decisions of the Trump/Musk administration added $300 million to our state deficit.
No mandate. Image: CSES design.
By Jan Plotczyk November 19, 2024
 The 2024 presidential election was over swiftly. The Associated Press called it at 5:34 am on Nov. 6, and by 8 am, President-elect Donald Trump was crowing about the “ historic mandate ” given to him by the American people. A “mandate”? Turns out not. Trump jumped to an early lead on election night, but in the following days, his lead diminished as mail-in and provisional ballots were counted. A Baltimore Banner article on Nov. 6 highlighted the “Trump shift” that had occurred in every political subdivision in Maryland, even in counties where Democrat Kamala Harris won. This shift described the increase in Trump support since his loss to President Joe Biden in 2020 . As of Nov. 6, the biggest Trump shift was an 8.1% increase in his support in red Cecil County, but there were also shifts in the central Maryland counties that are the state’s Democratic strongholds — 4.3% in Montgomery and lesser amounts in other blue counties. Fourteen counties recorded shifts of 4% or more. On the Eastern Shore, every county had a shift over 4.5% except Talbot (2.7%), and the five largest shifts were Shore counties. For the state’s Democrats, it did not look encouraging. But as mail-in and provisional ballots were counted across the state, the Trump shift was reduced everywhere, and as of Nov. 16, disappeared altogether in Garrett (-1.2%) and Charles (-0.1%) counties. The shift dropped below 3% in all Maryland counties. Cecil’s shift became 2.1%. Montgomery’s shift dropped to 2.9%. Talbot’s shift declined to 0.2%, lowest of the Eastern Shore counties. Now, instead of five, only two of the highest five shifts were in Eastern Shore counties. The red bars in the chart below represent the Trump shift percentage values as of Nov. 16, in ascending order. The grey bars represent the misleading (and ephemeral) Trump shift percentage values as of Nov. 6. Please note the degree to which the Trump shift lessened and disappeared in the 10 days after the election. Another red mirage. But if you had only read the Nov. 6 article and not looked at the updated data, you would have been fooled into thinking Trump support is stronger than it is.
Show More