Renewable energy vs. cultural preservation - Solar, Wind and Land: Conflicts in Renewable Energy Development - page 138

researchers have offered a few particular suggestions for those considering
solar energy development on historic sites. Such strategies include installing
systems only on new additions of historic buildings when possible and
not installing solar panels that obstruct views of a roof's “architecturally
significant features.” 111 As the market for solar energy products grows,
manufacturers are also beginning to design solar panels with camouflaging
features that could also help to minimize their visual impacts on historic
properties. For instance, some companies now sell solar panels in a wide
variety of colors. One company sells “tile red” solar panels—panels that
blend in far better than conventional panels on rooftops with Spanish tile. 112
Of course, many strategies for minimizing a solar array's impacts on
a historic site also add to the array's cost or reduce its productivity. For
example, installing solar panels in less visible areas may also give them less
direct sunlight access. Colored solar panels also tend to cost more than
conventional ones. 113 These additional costs can potentially dissuade some
would-be solar energy users from going solar at all. In the case of Chandler
and Wingate, the Historic Preservation Review Board's requirements would
have undercut the economics of their proposed project so much that the
couple never installed solar panels on their home.
Recognizing that historic preservation laws could deter solar panel
installations, lawmakers in some jurisdictions have tried to craft provisions
aimed at mitigating this deterrent effect. For instance, statutes in some U.S.
states allow local governments to impose conditions or restrictions on solar
energy systems in historic districts only “when an alternative of reasonable
comparable cost or convenience is available” 114 or when the local restric-
tions “do not significantly impair” a system's effectiveness.115 115 These laws
provide some limited guidance to local governments regarding how to
balance historic preservation and solar energy. Unfortunately, they contain
ambiguous terms such as “reasonable” and “significantly” that create very
little certainty for parties operating under such provisions.
Laws in California provide a bit more clarity regarding the balance
between solar energy and historic preservation. Statutory provisions
enacted in that state allow local governments to impose only “reasonable
restrictions” on solar energy installations, defining “reasonable restric-
tions” as those that “do not significantly increase the cost of the system or
significantly decrease its efficiency or specified performance or allow for an
alternative system of comparable cost, efficiency, and energy conservation
benefits.”116 116 California's statute goes on to define a “significant” cost
increase as “an amount not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000) over
the system cost as originally specified and proposed, or a decrease in system
efficiency of an amount exceeding 20 percent as originally specified and
proposed.” 117
California's approach to this issue is appealing in that it provides greater
certainty to all parties involved. In situations where the expected neigh-
borhood impacts from a proposed solar array on an historic building are