As Massachusetts tries to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 — necessitating seven to 10 times its current solar capacity — contentious cases like Shutesbury illuminate a complex interplay of federal and state policy, grid infrastructure, and economics. Such factors can lead to seemingly counterintuitive proposals that threaten to pit activist against activist, like cutting down forestland to reduce the state’s carbon emissions.
One of the most popular alternatives to fossil fuels, solar energy, has a problem it needs land. With that land hunger comes inherent conflict, recently highlighted in Belchertown where a vigorous local fight has sprung up over proposals to build.