sPower facility would be better than more houses

I am a huge lover of trees. I am also a huge proponent of solar power because I believe that is a big part of the solution to global warming.

There is a false narrative going on regarding the sPower solar project. Many have said that removing the forest will be an ecological nightmare. But this is not a forest. This is a tree farm. It is a mono-culture and is not a place that wildlife are even going to find food.

The trees will be cut down in the next few years and then the family that owns it will sell it to developers. More traffic, much more pollution from chemicals used on the grass and more stormwater.

In contrast, sPower will only cover about half of the acreage with panels and the other half of the land will be preserved as open space. If this property is developed, and the owner has a right to do that, then there would be no buffer or barrier to shield landowners abutting the properties.

We surely don’t need traffic from an additional 1,000 or more houses on Route 3. The solar farm is consistent and provides a buffer to other landowners, plus creates a renewable resource.

Anne Little


Load comments