Understanding the Potential Impacts of Utility-Scale Solar Facilities on Groundwater and Surface Water in Georgia

Georgia is experiencing rapid growth in utility-scale solar energy development. Utility-scale solar facilities, often occupying a large area, typically consist of ground-mounted photovoltaic panels, access roads, electrical infrastructure, and supporting equipment. These facilities are increasingly being constructed on agricultural and forested lands throughout the Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain regions of Georgia.

What is a Utility-Scale Solar Facility?

Utility-scale solar facilities are large solar-energy projects with installed or nameplate capacity of 1 megawatt (MW) or greater that generate electricity for distribution through the local or regional electric power grid. The installed or nameplate capacity reflects the total or maximum electricity that a system can produce from all applicable generators at a specific site. It is usually determined or provided by the manufacturer based on the number and capacity of the modules installed.

Most facilities use photovoltaic panels mounted on steel racking systems. Projects typically include access roads, inverters, transformers, substations, fencing, and supporting infrastructure.

Most utility-scale systems in Georgia use ground-mounted photovoltaic technology. Facilities may occupy anywhere from dozens to thousands of acres, depending on generating capacity, site characteristics, and design. Many newer projects also include battery-energy storage systems that improve reliability and energy availability.

Current Status of Solar Development in Georgia

Georgia has become a national leader in solar-energy development. Utility-scale solar projects are distributed across multiple physiographic regions, including the Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Valley and Ridge. Continued growth is expected because of rising electricity demand, declining solar costs, and public and private investments in renewable energy.

According to the Solar Energy Industries Association (https://seia.org) and UGA’s Carl Vinson Institute of Government, at the end of 2025, Georgia had 155 operational utility-scale solar facilities on 21,000 to 37,000 acres of land, with a total installed or nameplate capacity of 5.3 gigawatts (GW; 1 GW = 1,000 MW). These facilities invested an estimated $9.6 billion across 75 counties (out of Georgia’s 159), with representation in each regional commission’s footprint.

Another 4.1 GW across 19 utility-scale facilities is planned and expected to come online by 2030, requiring an estimated 17,000 to 29,000 acres of land. By 2030, both operational and planned utility-scale solar facilities in Georgia are expected to reach 9.4 GW of solar capacity, occupying 38,000 to 66,000 acres.

Nationally, at the end of 2025, Georgia ranked 8^th in total, 6^th in utility-scale, 39^th in residential, and 24^th in nonresidential distributed generation (DG) of installed solar capacity. Combined, Georgia’s installed solar capacity reached 7.7 GW by the end of 2025, enough to power close to 900,000 homes.

Because solar-development statistics change rapidly, readers should consult the most recent information from state agencies and industry organizations (e.g., the Solar Energy Industries Association) when evaluating current acreage, installed capacity, and future development plans.

What are the Main Components of Solar Panels Used in Utility-Scale Solar Facilities?

Photovoltaic (PV) systems convert sunlight directly into electricity. Crystalline-silicon PV modules dominate the market because of their efficiency, durability, and long operating life. Thin-film PV technologies, including cadmium telluride (CdTe) and copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS), are also used in some applications.

Solar panels are constructed using glass, polymers, semiconductor materials, and conductive metals. Individual cells are assembled into modules, modules are connected into arrays, and arrays are linked to electrical equipment that delivers power to the grid.

Most solar PV projects use single-axis tracking systems that let panels track the sun as it moves across the sky, improving production. More sophisticated, dual-axis systems rotate panels in two directions, capturing even more sunlight throughout the day.

Some regions of the United States also use concentrating solar power (CSP) systems instead of PV solar panels. These systems use mirrors to focus sunlight, producing heat that drives steam turbines to generate electricity. However, CSP facilities are uncommon in Georgia.

How do Solar Facilities Interact with the Water Cycle?

Water continuously moves through the environment via precipitation, interception, infiltration, evapotranspiration, runoff, groundwater recharge, and streamflow (the hydrologic cycle). Utility-scale solar facilities can influence several of these processes.

Unlike urban development, solar facilities typically do not cover entire sites with impervious surfaces. Vegetation often remains beneath and between panel rows in many projects. Nevertheless, solar panels intercept rainfall and redistribute water toward drip lines, creating localized differences in runoff and infiltration patterns.

Construction activities may alter soil structure, vegetation cover, and drainage patterns. Consequently, solar development can influence hydrologic processes on its site, particularly during construction.

Because groundwater and surface water are connected, changes in infiltration, recharge, or runoff can influence nearby streams, wetlands, ponds, and aquifers.

What are the Potential Impacts on Surface Water?

Surface-water impacts depend on site conditions, design characteristics, and management practices. Rainwater flowing from solar panels can concentrate at panel edges, potentially increasing localized runoff and erosion.

Potential concerns include increased runoff, altered runoff timing, soil erosion, sediment delivery to nearby streams, and changes in drainage pathways. The magnitude of these impacts depends on slope, soil texture, rainfall intensity, vegetation cover, and facility design.

However, well-designed and well-vegetated facilities can maintain hydrologic behavior similar to that of grassland or pasture systems, thereby reducing adverse effects on nearby surface waters.

Considerations for Georgia

Runoff concerns may be greatest in:

highly erodible Coastal Plain soils
steep Piedmont landscapes
areas receiving intense convective storms
recently graded sites

Stormwater Management Considerations

Stormwater management is among the most important aspects of solar-facility design and operation. Effective stormwater systems reduce erosion, improve infiltration, and minimize downstream impacts.

Common practices include maintaining vegetative cover, preserving natural drainage patterns where feasible, installing level spreaders, stabilizing disturbed soils, constructing sediment-control structures, and implementing stormwater-management practices after construction is complete.

State and local permitting processes often require stormwater-management plans that address site-specific conditions and protect receiving waters.

Could a Solar Facility Increase the Risk of Flooding?

Questions about flooding are common among residents close to solar facilities. Available evidence suggests that properly designed facilities with healthy vegetation and effective stormwater controls generally do not substantially increase flood risk.

Flooding concerns may be greater on steep slopes, in highly erodible soils, or on sites with inadequate stormwater controls. Site-specific engineering evaluations are therefore important during project planning.

What are the Potential Impacts on Soil Erosion and Sedimentation?

Sediment is one of the most common pollutants affecting surface water resources in Georgia. Construction activities associated with solar development can temporarily increase erosion and sediment transport if soils are left exposed.

Excessive sedimentation can:

reduce water clarity (increase turbidity)
degrade aquatic habitat quality
lower water storage capacity of rivers, streams, reservoirs, and ponds with sediments
increase drinking-water treatment costs

Erosion- and sediment-control measures should therefore be implemented before, during, and after construction. Establishing permanent vegetation is one of the most effective methods for minimizing long-term sediment losses.

Can Solar Facilities Improve Water Resource Conditions?

In some situations, yes, solar facilities can improve water resource conditions. Solar facilities do not necessarily have negative environmental outcomes.

Sometimes, converting intensively managed cropland to perennial, permanent vegetation beneath solar arrays can provide environmental benefits. Potential benefits include:

reduced erosion
improved soil structure
increased soil organic matter
enhanced infiltration
improved pollinator habitat
reduced sediment transport

Benefits are a more likely outcome when native, diverse, pollinator-friendly vegetation is established and maintained throughout the project’s life.

How Do Solar Panels Affect Soil Moisture Redistribution?

Solar panels create shaded microclimates that can alter soil moisture patterns. The potential impacts in this regard may include:

reduced evaporation beneath panels
increased moisture near the drip edges
spatial redistribution of soil water
altered plant-water relationships

These changes may influence plant growth and infiltration, but do not necessarily result in negative groundwater impacts. The vegetation growing beneath panels may use water more efficiently because of reduced evaporative demand, thereby conserving soil moisture.

What are the Potential Impacts on Groundwater Recharge?

Groundwater recharge occurs when water infiltrates through soils and reaches underlying aquifers. Solar facilities may influence recharge through:

soil compaction from the movement of heavy equipment used during construction
changes in vegetation
construction of access roads or equipment pads

However, these impacts on recharge are highly site-specific and are generally less severe than those associated with urban development. Soil type, rainfall, topography, and facility management all influence recharge outcomes.

What are the Potential Impacts on Groundwater Quality?

Routine operation of photovoltaic facilities generally poses minimal risk of groundwater contamination. Potential concerns are usually associated with:

accidental spills of fuels, lubricants, or hydraulic fluids
improper handling of other hazardous materials
equipment maintenance activities
construction activities

Modern solar panels are engineered to withstand environmental exposure, and panel breakage rates are relatively low. Therefore, properly operated solar facilities generally pose a low risk of direct groundwater contamination.

Do Solar Panels Contaminate Drinking Water?

Under proper operating conditions, solar panels pose a very low risk of contaminating drinking water. Potential risks are generally associated with construction activities and accidental spills.

Drinking Water, PFAS, and Solar Panels

Residents often have questions about PFAS (“forever chemicals”) contamination from solar facilities. Based on available evidence, PFAS compounds are not commonly used as major components of commercial photovoltaic panels.

The current scientific literature provides little evidence that operating solar panels is a significant source of PFAS contamination in soil, groundwater, or drinking water. It’s important to continue this research because the public remains concerned about PFAS in the environment.

Are Decommissioned (Retired) Solar Panels Hazardous Waste?

EPA’s testing of solar panels in the marketplace for hazardous waste has indicated that different varieties of solar panels contain different metals in semiconductors and solders. Some of these metals, like lead and cadmium, are harmful to human health and the environment at high levels. If these metals are present in high enough quantities in the solar panels, solar panel waste could be considered a hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Even within the same model and manufacturer, some solar panels are considered hazardous waste, and some are not.

Proper recycling, reuse, and disposal practices are important components of responsible solar-energy development. Federal and state regulations should be followed when managing retired solar panels.

Is There Potential for Soil and Water Contamination From Hazardous Metals in Solar Panels?

Improper disposal of used solar panels could contribute to soil and water contamination from the hazardous metals they contain. However, there is not enough research-based evidence to draw a valid conclusion.

What Can Residents and Communities Do if They are Concerned About the Impact of Solar Facilities on Water Quality?

If residents and communities near established or proposed solar facilities have concerns about potential contamination of surface water and groundwater (including well water), they may consider testing those waters for the potential contaminants discussed above to establish a baseline water quality. They should maintain records of laboratory reports, sample dates, and sampling locations.

Periodic water quality monitoring results down the road could be compared with the baseline to evaluate and determine water quality impairment (if any). However, the outcomes of this exercise are not going to serve as confirmatory evidence of contamination caused by the solar facilities, especially for any litigation.

Your local Extension office can provide guidance on water testing, interpreting results, and available educational resources. Visit the UGA Extension website to locate your nearest office (https://extension.uga.edu/county-offices.html).

Conclusion

Utility-scale solar facilities are expected to remain an important component of Georgia’s energy future. Most potential impacts on groundwater and surface water are associated with site preparation, construction, and land management rather than electricity generation itself.

When facilities are properly sited, designed, vegetated, and maintained, risks to water resources can be minimized. In some situations, solar development may even provide environmental benefits by improving soil protection and reducing erosion.

Careful planning, sound engineering, effective stormwater management, and ongoing environmental stewardship are essential for protecting Georgia’s groundwater and surface-water resources while supporting renewable-energy development.

References

Alzahrani, A. S. (2025). A review: The potential impact of large-scale solar farms (LSSFs) on the water cycle. Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Engineering and Architecture, 16, 206–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43995-025-00102-7

Atlanta Regional Commission & Georgia Environmental Protection Division. (2016). Georgia stormwater management manual. https://cdn.atlantaregional.org/wp-content/uploads/gsmm-2016-final.pdf

Choi, C. S., Macknick, J., Li, Y., Bloom, D., McCall, J., & Ravi, S. (2023). Environmental co-benefits of maintaining native vegetation with solar photovoltaic infrastructure. Earth’s Future, 11(6), e2023EF003542. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023EF003542.

Choi, C. S., Macknick, J., McCall, J., Bertel, R., and Ravi, S. (2024). Multi-year analysis of physical interactions between solar PV arrays and underlying soil–plant complex in vegetated utility-scale systems. Applied Energy, 365, 123227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.123227

Dietz, J., & Eavenson, M. (2025). Utility-scale solar land use in Georgia: 2025 status update. University of Georgia Carl Vinson Institute of Government. https://cviog.uga.edu/resources/documents/services/solar-status.pdf

Dincer, I., & Ratlamwala, T. A. H. (2013). Solar thermal power systems. In Reference module in earth systems and environmental sciences. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.05931-5

Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission. (2024). Manual for erosion and sediment control in Georgia. https://gaswcc.georgia.gov/urban-erosion-sediment-control/technical-guidance

Hernandez, R. R., Easter, S. B., Murphy-Mariscal, M. L., Maestre, F. T., Tavassoli, M., Allen, E. B., Barrows, C. W., Belnap, J., Ochoa-Hueso, R., Ravi, S., & Allen, M. F. (2014). Environmental impacts of utility-scale solar energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 29, 766–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.041

Integrated Energy Systems Office. (2023, July 10). Success story—Improving solar permitting by addressing questions about stormwater runoff. U.S. Department of Energy. https://www.energy.gov/cmei/systems/articles/success-story-improving-solar-permitting-addressing-questions-about

Nair, A. A., Rohith, A. N., Cibin, R., & McPhillips, L. (2024). A framework to model the hydrology of solar farms using EPA SWMM. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 29, 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-023-09922-0

Pennisi, S. V., Kvien, C. K., & Schmidt, J. (2020). Empowering biodiversity on solar farms [Research impact statement]. University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. https://www.caes.uga.edu/research/impact/impact-statement/9839/empowering-biodiversity-on-solar-farms.html

Ranabhat, K., Patrikeev, L., Revina, A. A., Andrianov, K., Lapshinsky, V., & Sofronova, E. (2016). An introduction to solar cell technology. Journal of Applied Engineering Science, 14(4), 481–491. https://doi.org/10.5937/jaes14-10879

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2025, August 13). End-of-life solar panels: Regulations and management. Retrieved June 3, 2026, from https://www.epa.gov/hw/end-life-solar-panels-regulations-and-management

Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L., & Alley, W. M. (1998). Ground water and surface water: A single resource (Circular 1139). U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1139

Yavari, R., Zaliwciw, D., Cibin, R., & McPhillips, L. (2022). Minimizing environmental impacts of solar farms: A review of current science on landscape hydrology and guidance on stormwater management. Environmental Research: Infrastructure and Sustainability, 2, 032002. https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/ac76dd

Yuan, B., Li, Y., Li, J., Guo, M., Li, M., & Xie, S. (2026). Review of the cumulative ecological effects of utility-scale photovoltaic power generation. Solar, 6(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/solar6010009

The permalink for this UGA Extension publication is fieldreport.caes.uga.edu/publications/TP122/

Temporary Publication 122 Published on June 26, 2026

Published by University of Georgia Cooperative Extension. For more information or guidance, contact your local Extension office. The University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences (working cooperatively with Fort Valley State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the counties of Georgia) offers its educational programs, assistance, and materials to all people without regard to age, color, disability, genetic information, national origin, race, religion, sex, or veteran status, and is an Equal Opportunity Institution.