Recent polling said 63 percent of Americans support renewable energy investment…in theory. But in practice, Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) opposition to new energy infrastructure prevents about 45 percent of renewable energy proposals from being built across the country, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

NIMBY opposition to utility-scale renewable energy projects is well-known, like the Cape Wind offshore wind project in Massachusetts, which took nine years to obtain permits because of opposition from local residents. But what about small-scale renewables – does NIMBYism threaten them as well? energyNOW! correspondent Lee Patrick Sullivan explored how local opposition, in various forms, is preventing people from taking charge of their energy use. The full segment is available below:

Maryland engineer and inventor Robert Bruninga is an example of how state laws can prevent distributed renewable development. He had an unused boat dock he thought would be perfect for a solar array, and applied for a permit to install solar panels on the pier.

Unfortunately, Maryland law says nothing is allowed on a pier unless it’s of an aquatic nature, a decision that frustrated Bruninga. “If I’ve got a hundred feet of pier that’s just sitting out there in the Sun all day long, why can’t I put solar panels on it?”

Another Marylander tells a similar story, but his opposition took a different form. High school science and environment teacher Patrick Earle wanted to install a solar array on his roof, but knew the silver maple tree on his property created too much shade to generate electricity. Unfortunately for Earle, Takoma Park, Maryland, is one of the few municipalities with a private urban forestry management program – meaning he had to ask permission to cut down a tree on his own land.

Once his proposal was reviewed, the town’s arborist told Earle he’d have to plant 23 trees or pay $4,000 into the city’s tree fund to replace the one he wanted to cut down. Since his property is only a sixth of an acre, it looked like Earle wouldn’t get his solar array. “It was really putting the project out of reach for me and was going to be a deal breaker.”

Fortunately for Earle, he found a loophole in the local law that said the replacement trees didn’t have to be planted on his property and got the city to reduce the number of replacement trees if he planted bigger ones. So he gave out free trees to his neighbors at a total cost of $600, and is now the proud owner of a rooftop solar array generating 75 percent of his home’s electricity needs.

In both cases, local law proved to be the impediment to building new solar, and was difficult to get around. Bruninga’s project has been under appeal for a year and a half, but in the interim he set up panels behind his house, moving them every month to deal with shifting tree shade. Earle wasn’t able to convince the city council to consider the benefits of solar power when deciding how many trees to plant for other homeowners.

But both cases also show the ability of innovative solutions to resolving barriers to new small-scale renewables, and may help other homeowners remove their backyards from the NIMBY category.