Virginia May Need 16 More Wind Farms Under Current Policy

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes · Last updated: 10 October 2026

Virginia’s governor’s energy plan shows the state could need roughly 16 more onshore wind farms under current policies, alongside 33,300 megawatts of additional solar and thousands of megawatts of new nuclear and gas capacity, as first reported by Cardinal News. The figures come from the plan’s scenarios and datasets cited there: the Weldon Cooper Solar Database for existing solar and the plan’s own forecasts for capacity needs to 2050. The scale is measured in installed nameplate capacity: the report contrasts Virginia’s roughly 30,000 megawatts of in-state nameplate capacity and 10,000 megawatts it imports with low, moderate and PJM forecasts that require adding tens of thousands more megawatts by 2050.

How big is the gap: nameplate capacity versus delivered power

The governor’s plan frames need in terms of installed nameplate capacity. It lists Virginia’s in-state nameplate at about 30,000 megawatts and says the state buys another 10,000 megawatts from outside, producing a baseline of roughly 40,000 megawatts on which future demand is measured.

Across the plan’s three demand pathways, the amount to add by 2050 varies widely: the Low Load Forecast pushes Virginia toward adding capacity approaching twice its current installed nameplate capacity (about 60,000 megawatts), the moderate forecast sums to roughly 90,000 new megawatts, and the PJM high forecast anticipates about 120,000 new megawatts. Those are nameplate figures, not guaranteed output, so the mix of baseload, dispatchable and intermittent resources matters as much as the raw megawatts.

That distinction is central to practical choices: a 1,000‑megawatt nuclear unit delivers near‑continuous output, but a 1,000‑megawatt solar nameplate produces far less on average because of night and weather, unless paired with storage. The plan uses nameplate to compare pathways; the policy debate is over the blend of technologies that will actually supply demand when it occurs.

Solar arithmetic and siting politics

Virginia’s current solar inventory is 17,264 megawatts, according to the Weldon Cooper Solar Database cited in the plan. Under the plan’s current‑policy scenario, the state would add 33,300 megawatts of new solar, raising total solar to 50,564 megawatts — an increase the plan quantifies in both capacity and land use.

The Solar Database records solar and storage occupying 155,080 acres today, an average of 8.98 acres per megawatt. Applying that ratio to the 33,300 megawatts the plan calls for produces a derived figure of about 299,034 acres of additional solar land. To put that in local terms, the plan’s arithmetic equates to roughly the area of Wythe County being allocated to solar under the current‑policy route.

That scale collides with local politics. The plan and local reporting cite county actions and public opposition in Mecklenburg, Henry and Botetourt counties as examples of the resistance any expanded ground‑mounted solar program can expect. The plan notes alternatives — brownfields, parking covers and rooftop deployment — but the raw acreage numbers show why siting remains a central constraint.

Onshore wind: available resource, but slow and contested

Virginia has almost no commercial onshore wind in operation today; the Rocky Forge project under construction near Eagle Rock is rated at 79.3 megawatts. The governor’s plan indicates 480 megawatts of onshore wind in its policy scenarios, which is about 16.5 times Rocky Forge’s nameplate.

The plan compares that requirement with examples elsewhere: two North Carolina wind farms totalling 397 megawatts average roughly 198 megawatts apiece, implying Virginia would need about 2.4 projects the size of those North Carolina farms to meet 480 megawatts. The technical maps from James Madison University’s Center for the Advancement of Sustainable Energy show resource areas, but the plan and local history demonstrate how long siting fights can take.

Rocky Forge itself illustrates the timeline and legal friction: first proposed in 2015 with an initial 2017 target, it took roughly 11 years to move to its current stage and generated legal opposition despite a remote site. If Virginia pursues onshore wind at scale, the state must resolve whether to rely on local approvals or to centralize siting decisions to meet the numerical targets in the plan.

Nuclear and gas: trade‑offs of land, time and dispatchability

Virginia’s existing nuclear fleet totals 3,670 megawatts: North Anna has two 945‑megawatt reactors and Surry has two 890‑megawatt reactors. The plan’s scenarios call for adding between 1,000 and 5,200 megawatts of nuclear, with the current‑policy path needing 3,750 to 3,950 megawatts more, per the plan’s accounting.

That narrow range matters because of small modular reactors (SMRs). The plan notes three SMR proposals in Virginia: a Dominion–Amazon project of “at least 300 megawatts” at North Anna, Appalachian’s 300–500 megawatt concept at Joshua Falls, and an Amherst County developer proposal of 650 megawatts. Together those proposed units total about 1,250 to 1,450 megawatts if built.

If Virginia needs 3,750–3,950 megawatts under current policy, and an SMR is treated as 300 megawatts per the U.S. Department of Energy’s typical assumption, the state would need roughly 12–13 additional 300‑megawatt SMRs beyond those proposed. Nuclear brings low land use and round‑the‑clock output, but long lead times and unproven commercial SMR economics are central constraints.

Natural gas is part of the mix too. The state’s natural gas nameplate is 13,711 megawatts; current policies foresee adding 6,723 megawatts more (a 50.9% increase). The plan notes that a large buildout of gas could lock in infrastructure and make the Clean Economy Act’s carbon‑free targets harder to reach.

What could push the plan toward or away from its current‑policy mix

The bottom line

The governor’s energy plan proves the arithmetic: meeting projected demand through 2050 requires choices about where to put capacity, not just which technologies to favour. Under current policies the state faces a solar build‑out that could consume roughly 299,034 acres, an onshore wind requirement equal to about 16 Rocky Forge projects, and a nuclear gap that leans heavily on SMR deployment unless large plants or distributed resources scale faster. Those are not abstract trade‑offs — they are land, permitting and timeline problems. Resolving them will require clearer siting rules, accelerated rooftop and brownfield strategies, or political choices about which constraints the state is prepared to override.

What to watch

• Watch for any Virginia General Assembly action on making solar siting a state responsibility; no date has been set.
• Watch for final decisions or filings on the Dominion–Amazon small reactor at North Anna; no date has been set.
• Watch for permitting activity or formal approvals for the proposed Amherst County small reactor project; no date has been set.