The analysis, published in Land Use Policy, calculated that large-scale solar projects clearing forest land generate net benefits of $2.7 million to $12.7 million over a 20-year span. Much of that comes from avoided emissions, with carbon payback achieved within the first year of operation. At standard carbon pricing, those avoided emissions alone carry an estimated value exceeding $4 million.
But the picture is far more complicated on the ground. Property value declines account for more than 70% of the total negative impacts identified in the study. Homes within about half a mile of proposed solar arrays can see an estimated 2% loss in value, based on Massachusetts and Rhode Island housing data.
As Christine L. Crago, lead author and associate professor in the Department of Resource Economics and the Commonwealth Honors College at UMass Amherst says “From a societal-level perspective, you have positive net benefits, but a lot of the costs are borne by local actors. So, we have to balance our societal goals with the harm on these local communities.”
The research also notes what it leaves out: groundwater effects, wildlife disruption, and ecological changes. These are often decisive in permitting battles, with some projects halted over such concerns.
Massachusetts ranks among the top 10 U.S. states for installed solar capacity, yet nearly half of its recent forest loss is tied to solar projects. That tension underscores a policy challenge: expanding renewable energy without alienating the very communities asked to host it.
The study’s framework provides developers and regulators with a replicable tool to evaluate both benefits and trade-offs. For companies, it highlights the importance of addressing local impacts early. Community benefit agreements, for instance, may help offset property-related losses and smooth the path to approval.
For investors, the research signals that project viability is not only about carbon math but also about local economics. Ignoring community-level impacts can stall or derail development. Those who factor in compensation and engagement strategies stand a better chance of building durable, accepted projects.
In short: solar projects deliver global gains quickly, but unless the local balance sheet is managed, those gains come with real costs for nearby residents.
