IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p5895-d1109913.html

Vegetation Management Cost and Maintenance Implications of Different Ground Covers at Utility-Scale Solar Sites

Author

Listed:
  • James McCall

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Parkway, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • James Macdonald

    (Centre for Land Policy and Valuations (CPSV), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Campus Diagonal Sud, Edifici A, Av. Diagonal 649, 08028 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Robin Burton

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Parkway, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • Jordan Macknick

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Parkway, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

Abstract

Utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV) is the largest and fastest-growing sector of the solar energy market, and plays an important role in ensuring that state and local jurisdictions can meet renewable energy targets. Potential adverse environmental impacts of utility-scale solar PV are well-documented, and the effects of diverse mitigation and dual land use strategies under the banner of ’low-impact solar’ are justly receiving more attention; this article seeks to contribute to improving understanding of this topic. Capital costs for different PV configurations are well-documented; however, operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for vegetation management at low-impact utility-scale solar PV sites are not as well-understood, particularly as they compare to costs for sites that use more conventional ground cover practices, such as turfgrass or gravel. After a literature review of different vegetation strategies and O&M cost considerations, we collected data from utility-scale solar PV O&M stakeholders, including site owners/operators, O&M service providers, vegetation maintenance companies, and solar graziers, on costs and activities associated with vegetation management at low-impact, agrivoltaic, and conventional PV sites. In this paper, we perform data analysis to detail the per-activity and total O&M costs for vegetation management at PV sites with different ground covers and management practices, providing the most comprehensive and detailed assessment of PV vegetation O&M costs to date. For the 54 sites included in our analysis, we found that while the per-acre and per-kilowatt dc (kW dc ) costs for individual activities, such as mowing, trimming, and herbicide application at native or pollinator friendly ground covers, were lower than at turfgrass sites, the total combined vegetation O&M costs were slightly higher; this is presumably because more individual activities are required for the first 3–5 years of vegetation establishment. Qualitative results include recommendations from data providers for site and system design, and ongoing vegetation management operations.

Suggested Citation

  • James McCall & James Macdonald & Robin Burton & Jordan Macknick, 2023. "Vegetation Management Cost and Maintenance Implications of Different Ground Covers at Utility-Scale Solar Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5895-:d:1109913
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5895/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5895/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiser, Ryan & Millstein, Dev & Mai, Trieu & Macknick, Jordan & Carpenter, Alberta & Cohen, Stuart & Cole, Wesley & Frew, Bethany & Heath, Garvin, 2016. "The environmental and public health benefits of achieving high penetrations of solar energy in the United States," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 472-486.
    2. Aidana Chalgynbayeva & Zoltán Gabnai & Péter Lengyel & Albiona Pestisha & Attila Bai, 2023. "Worldwide Research Trends in Agrivoltaic Systems—A Bibliometric Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-25, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Amro A. Zahrawi & Aly Mousaad Aly, 2024. "A Review of Agrivoltaic Systems: Addressing Challenges and Enhancing Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-36, September.
    2. Kochendoerfer, Nikola & Westbrook, A. Sophie & McMillan, Christina E. & Lapierre, P. Andrew & Zaman, Muhammad A. & Morris, Scott H. & DiTommaso, Antonio & Grodsky, Steven M., 2025. "Co-location of sheep grazing and solar energy production yields agrotechnological synergies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    3. Sturchio, Matthew A. & Kannenberg, Steven A. & Knapp, Alan K., 2024. "Agrivoltaic arrays can maintain semi-arid grassland productivity and extend the seasonality of forage quality," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 356(C).
    4. Gasch, Adam & Lara, Rafael & Pearce, Joshua M., 2025. "Financial analysis of agrivoltaic sheep: Breeding and auction lamb business models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 381(C).
    5. Jacob T. Stid & Siddharth Shukla & Anthony D. Kendall & Annick Anctil & David W. Hyndman & Jeremy Rapp & Robert P. Anex, 2025. "Impacts of agrisolar co-location on the food–energy–water nexus and economic security," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 8(6), pages 702-713, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kumar, Pankaj & Brar, S.K. & Pandove, Gulab & Aulakh, C.S., 2021. "Bioformulation of Azotobacter spp. and Streptomyces badius on the productivity, economics and energetics of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    2. Ahmed S. Alahmed & Lang Tong, 2022. "Integrating Distributed Energy Resources: Optimal Prosumer Decisions and Impacts of Net Metering Tariffs," Papers 2204.06115, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    3. Yushchenko, Alisa & Patel, Martin Kumar, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency programs: How to better understand and improve from multiple stakeholder perspectives?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 538-550.
    4. Craig, Michael T. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Hodge, Bri-Mathias & Williams, Nathaniel J. & Severnini, Edson, 2018. "A retrospective analysis of the market price response to distributed photovoltaic generation in California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 394-403.
    5. Sara Ilahi & Yongchang Wu & Muhammad Ahsan Ali Raza & Wenshan Wei & Muhammad Imran & Lyankhua Bayasgalankhuu, 2019. "Optimization Approach for Improving Energy Efficiency and Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emission of Wheat Crop using Data Envelopment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Lisa Bosman & József Kádár & Brandon Yonnie & Amy LeGrande, 2024. "How Market Transformation Policies Can Support Agrivoltaic Adoption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Siff, Jackson & Gu, Jiajun & Zhang, K. Max, 2019. "Strategic planning for utility-scale solar photovoltaic development – Historical peak events revisited," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 1292-1301.
    8. Grazia Disciglio & Laura Frabboni & Annalisa Tarantino & Antonio Stasi, 2023. "Association between Dynamic Agrivoltaic System and Cultivation: Viability, Yields and Qualitative Assessment of Medical Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Girolamo Di Francia & Paolo Cupo, 2023. "A Cost–Benefit Analysis for Utility-Scale Agrivoltaic Implementation in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Tommaso Colussi & Matteo Romagnoli & Elena Villar, 2022. "The Intended and Unintended Consequences of Taxing Waste," CESifo Working Paper Series 9946, CESifo.
    11. Randle-Boggis, R.J. & Barron-Gafford, G.A. & Kimaro, A.A. & Lamanna, C. & Macharia, C. & Maro, J. & Mbele, A. & Hartley, S.E., 2025. "Harvesting the sun twice: Energy, food and water benefits from agrivoltaics in East Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    12. Grubert, E. & Zacarias, M., 2022. "Paradigm shifts for environmental assessment of decarbonizing energy systems: Emerging dominance of embodied impacts and design-oriented decision support needs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    13. Cohen, Stuart M. & Caron, Justin, 2018. "The economic impacts of high wind penetration scenarios in the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 558-573.
    14. Botelho, Anabela & Lourenço-Gomes, Lina & Pinto, Lígia & Sousa, Sara & Valente, Marieta, 2017. "Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: The application of two stated preferences approaches to a case-study in Portugal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 191-198.
    15. Sánchez-Pantoja, Núria & Vidal, Rosario & Pastor, M. Carmen, 2018. "Aesthetic impact of solar energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 227-238.
    16. Al-Dahidi, Sameer & Rinchi, Bilal & Dababseh, Raghad & Ayadi, Osama & Alrbai, Mohammad, 2024. "A geographic multi-scale machine learning framework for predicting solar irradiation on tilted surfaces," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    17. Ahmed S. Alahmed & Lang Tong, 2021. "On Net Energy Metering X: Optimal Prosumer Decisions, Social Welfare, and Cross-Subsidies," Papers 2109.09977, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    18. Kyu-Won Hwang & Chul-Yong Lee, 2024. "Estimating the Deterministic and Stochastic Levelized Cost of the Energy of Fence-Type Agrivoltaics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-19, April.
    19. Belligoni, Sara & Trader, Elizabeth & Li, Mengjie & Rahman, Mohammad Siddiqur & Ali, Javed & Enriquez, Alejandra Rodriguez & Nagaraj, Meghana & Aksha, Sanam K. & Stevens, Kelly A. & Wahl, Thomas & Emr, 2025. "Transdisciplinary research promoting clean and resilient energy systems for socially vulnerable communities: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    20. Hannah Pehle & Jan-Philipp Sasse & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2025. "Regional inequalities in air quality and health co-benefits due to climate change mitigation in the European electricity sector," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 1-22, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5895-:d:1109913. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.