Frank asked below why I singled Solar out over housing etc in regards to land use change.

First let me resist my concerns..

1) Why does Solar get a pass on indirect land use.. again the yield for mining critical resources requires tons of material processed with water or other harsher elements.. how is this helping the environment?

Ecological devastation is a bleak reality

https://www.mining-technology.com/analyst-comment/lithium-mining-negative-environmental-impact/
The environmental fallout from lithium mining is clear and far-reaching. Massive quantities of fresh water, classified as a precious resource in these arid regions, are diverted for lithium mining operations, fueling the salt flats brine. This leaves local communities and wildlife parched. Sulfuric acid and sodium hydroxide used in lithium extraction penetrate the soil and water, poisoning ecosystems and endangering species. Research from the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society shows that two flamingo species in Chile are threatened because of lithium mining.

Deforestation, habitat destruction and water pollution further exacerbate the ecological toll. The delicate balance of nature is disrupted, which leaves long-lasting damage that takes generations to heal. The carbon dioxide and other greenhouse emissions that come with the process of lithium mining, extraction and overall production are worse for the climate than the production of fossil fuel-powered vehicles. A study from The Wall Street Journal in 2019 revealed that 40% of the total climate impact caused by the production of lithium-ion batteries comes from the mining process itself. 

 
2)  Biden’s plan will require 6 to 10 million acres of solar panels.  Wow that’s a lot.  If a crop it would be the 5th or 6th largest behind Corn, Soybeans, Wheat and I believe Cotton.. Hay.. more than Sorghum and the rest.

 https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/us-department-energy-and-us-geological-survey-release-online-public-database-large

3) I’ve no problem with roof top or as shade over a parking lot.. but to convert significant acreage of farm ground to solar panels?!?  That’s pure folly.  Ugly, a potential environmental hazard.. 

https://www.americanexperiment.org/solar-panels-produce-tons-of-toxic-waste-literally/

Beyond the inefficient use of these resources to begin with (in the process of making crystalline silicon from silicon, as much as 80 percent of the raw silicon is lost), there are numerous human health concerns directly related to the manufacture and disposal of solar panels.

According to cancer biologist David H. Nguyen, PhD, toxic chemicals in solar panels include cadmium telluride, copper indium selenide, cadmium gallium (di)selenide, copper indium gallium (di)selenide, hexafluoroethane, lead, and polyvinyl fluoride. Silicon tetrachloride, a byproduct of producing crystalline silicon, is also highly toxic.

The pro-solar website EnergySage writes:

There are some chemicals used in the manufacturing process to prepare silicon and make the wafers for monocrystalline and polycrystalline panels. One of the most toxic chemicals created as a byproduct of this process is silicon tetrachloride. This chemical, if not handled and disposed of properly, can lead to burns on your skin, harmful air pollutants that increase lung disease, and if exposed to water can release hydrochloric acid, which is a corrosive substance bad for human and environmental health.

For any user of solar panels, this is not an immediate risk as it only affects manufacturers and recyclers. More disconcerting, however, is the environmental impact of these chemicals. Based on installed capacity and power-related weight, we can estimate that by 2016, photovoltaics had spread about 11,000 tons of lead and about 800 tons of cadmium. A hazard summary of cadmium compounds produced by the EPA points out that exposure to cadmium can lead to serious lung irritation and long-lasting impairment of pulmonary functions. Exposure to lead hardly needs further explanation. 

not many want to live next to these things?

Are they even net positive in energy consumption and resources wasted to produce them?