Solar Farms Are Killing NC’s Farmland – Nuclear Can Save It

North Carolina’s current energy policy aims to achieve carbon neutrality through the least cost path that maintains or improves grid reliability. Environmentalists have made it clear that they want the plan to be made up of solar and wind energy. While this may sound forward-thinking, it presents significant challenges, particularly for the state’s farmland.

A study by the John Locke Foundation looked at the difference between meeting the current energy policies needs through renewables vs. nuclear energy. In the case of renewables, they estimated that 7.1 million acres would be needed to guarantee reliability and power the state. That translates to almost 1/5^th of the state’s total acreage. Unlike solar and wind, nuclear power generates immense amounts of energy while occupying only a fraction of the land. The Locke study found that only a little over 15,000 acres would be needed for nuclear energy to meet the energy policies requirements. The sharp differences in needed land use can be seen in the chart below.

This land use dilemma directly impacts farmers, as valuable farmland is being converted into renewable energy farms, reducing the land available for food production and subsequently driving up costs. In addition, solar farms almost irreversibly damage soil quality, taking years to repair. Nuclear plants, in comparison, can provide reliable, around-the-clock energy without requiring vast tracts of farmland to be repurposed. If North Carolina truly wants to balance environmental sustainability with economic and agricultural stability, it must include nuclear energy in its strategy.

Beyond its efficiency and land conservation benefits, nuclear energy has direct advantages for agriculture. Nuclear techniques have been successfully employed in other countries to enhance crop yields, reduce pests, and improve soil health.

For example, in India, nuclear-derived isotopes have been used to develop improved crop varieties that are more resistant to pests and extreme weather conditions. The country’s Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) has used radiation-induced mutation breeding to create high-yield, drought-resistant rice and wheat strains. These innovations have contributed to food security and increased agricultural productivity.

Similarly, Argentina has used nuclear technology to enhance soil fertility and water efficiency through isotopic tracing techniques. By studying how plants absorb nutrients, scientists can optimize fertilizer use, ensuring crops receive the right balance of nutrients without excess runoff polluting water supplies.

Even in Africa, where food security is a pressing issue, nuclear science has been deployed to combat desertification. In Sudan, nuclear techniques have helped improve irrigation practices, making arid land more suitable for farming and boosting crop yields.

If North Carolina were to prioritize nuclear energy over land-intensive renewables, the state could not only preserve farmland but also explore nuclear-based agricultural advancements. Research into radiation-induced crop improvements could help local farmers develop more resilient crops suited to the state’s diverse climate. Additionally, nuclear techniques for soil and water management could enhance productivity while reducing environmental impact.

Instead of sidelining nuclear energy, North Carolina should integrate it into its energy strategy, ensuring that both the environment and agricultural viability are protected. The future of clean energy does not have to come at the cost of food security—by embracing nuclear power, we can achieve both goals efficiently and responsibly.