Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture Aerial Application Groundwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Farmers and aerial applicators warn turbines could complicate spraying, raise aquifer and cleanup concerns
Summary
A member of the Mississippi Agricultural Aviation Association told senators wind turbines placed across farmland could complicate GPS-guided aerial applications, raise costs for growers, and pose unresolved questions about shallow aquifers and hazardous-waste cleanup after turbine damage.
Glenn Holloway, a member of the Mississippi Agricultural Aviation Association who represented aerial applicators during testimony to the Mississippi Senate Energy and Senate Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks committees, told lawmakers that wind turbines placed within farmland could interfere with precision aerial applications and raise both operational and environmental concerns.
Holloway said Bolivar County and other Delta areas are heavily agricultural and depend on precise GPS-guided aerial spraying; turbines in “odd configurations” could force pilots to reroute, increase flight time and add per-hour costs that would be passed on to growers. He warned that seed-crop cross-pollination issues and changes to application patterns could affect seed rice production, a significant component of Delta agriculture.
Holloway also expressed concern about the region’s shallow water table—saying in testimony that wells sometimes encounter water at roughly 40 feet—and asked whether turbine foundations could penetrate aquifers or otherwise affect groundwater. He cited a case in Iowa where a lightning strike damaged a turbine and cleanup costs were reportedly substantial because regulators classified debris as hazardous waste.
Developers who testified answered technical questions on foundation design and site investigation. Stu Webster of Triple O Power said foundation depth depends on soil and bedrock and provided a general example of a 12-foot-deep, 30-foot-diameter foundation in some sites, but acknowledged geologic variability and that engineers perform borings “to sort of understand the matrix of the soil content and composition.” He added he did not believe turbine construction would realistically contaminate groundwater in typical scenarios.
Holloway urged an environmental impact study that accounts for aerial-application logistics, aquifer depth and long-term cleanup liabilities before further large-scale siting decisions are made. He closed by summarizing the economic stakes for Mississippi agriculture: “God’s not making any new land. And once it's gone, it's gone.”
Ending note: Committee members asked for more technical information from developers and agencies; no formal action was recorded in the hearing.
