The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Hotspots

The Top Five Renewable Energy Fights of the Year

A look at 2024’s most notorious conflicts in the energy transition.

A map of America.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Alright, friends. It’s time for a special edition of The Fight’s Hotspots, where we walk you through what we believe were the five most important project conflicts of the year. We decided this list based on the notoriety of the fight within the renewables sector as well as whether our reporting found it to be significant for the entire industry. And we included the opposition scores for these projects based on our internal Heatmap Pro data to help you better understand whether these fights were flukes or quite predictable.

We hope this helps you all in this, errhmm, trying time for developers right now.

1. Lava Ridge’s bad year – Magic Valley, Idaho (36 opposition score)

  • LS Energy’s Lava Ridge wind project might wind up the textbook example of how not to build a wind farm. The developer had initially botched getting consent from those most passionate about a nearby historic World War II internment camp for Japanese Americans, so despite its site in a gust-heavy rural landscape and a state ordinarily friendly to wind power, the project remains in hot water.
  • We previously told you how Idaho Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho warned of a potential executive order targeting Lava Ridge’s permit approvals.
  • However, a new wrinkle: the federal government completed its permitting for Lava Ridge and formally approved the project. It also appears from media reports that at least some activists’ concerns have been tempered by buffers the federal government placed on future wind development near the historic site.
  • Is… this victory? Unfortunately, plenty could still happen here. If a party were to sue, a future Trump administration would easily have the right to negotiate a settlement over that challenge and say it needs more analysis. I wouldn’t consider this project safe yet.

2. Oregon opts out of offshore wind – Coos County, Oregon (50 opposition score)

  • All of the sudden, over the course of an unusually warm September week, Oregon’s Democratic political leaders abandoned the development of floating offshore wind following an opposition campaign tied to local consternation and tribal heritage.
  • As we explained at the time, this led to the federal government canceling what would’ve been Oregon’s first lease sale for floating offshore wind. Now there’s essentially no chance of a lease sale for at least another four years, because Trump promised to halt all offshore wind development.
  • What does this mean? For starters, Democrats can turn into opponents of renewables too, overruling potential benefits for the climate or reliability, when pieces of their fractious coalitions turn sour over the perceived harms they see in development. (See also: the Piedmont transmission line in Maryland).

3. Oak Run and angry voltaics – Madison County, Ohio (96 opposition score)

  • Savion’s Oak Run was supposed to be the model for how to build solar in harmony with a farming community. By co-locating solar panel siting and some crop production, it was supposed to show that solar can be in the same place as farmland without harming even a scintilla of the food supply.
  • It didn’t go that way. Instead, Oak Run this year cemented itself as a poster child for conflict in renewables-hostile Ohio. We’ve explained a legal challenge over the project will decide the fate of all other renewables systems in the state.
  • The farmland dilemma itself is a bit of a misinformation problem. A USDA study released in September found that only up to roughly a fifth of farmland used for solar between 2012 and 2020 was taken out of production once panels were uninstalled.
  • And Oak Run’s issues itself may have ties to conspiracies, as the project’s loose connection to tech billionaire Bill Gates has become a bit of a rallying cry for local opponents.

4. bp’s Kentucky heartaches – Elizabethtown, Kentucky (63 opposition score)

  • Quite a bit has been written about the anti-renewables group Citizens for Responsible Solar. But it’s still hard not to marvel at just how easily they win in places in Kentucky, where a small but mighty group of residents have mobilized against oil giant bp in the city of Elizabethtown to all but kill a 128 megawatt solar farm.
  • We told you a month ago that we thought CRS would win against bp despite a clear plan to use private land and local donations to finally get shovels and steel into the ground – because it doesn’t take that many people to convince a city that popular will is on the side of the opposition.
  • Well, it turns out we were right. CRS is now celebrating that it got Elizabethtown to deny bp’s request for annexation to use the private land, after a large group showed up to the preceding city council meeting.
  • Elizabethtown’s denial has not previously been reported by the media, which is a big reason why Telesto Solar is on our list – it is our best indication yet that massive utility-scale solar projects might be getting snuffed out without the broader public knowing.

5. Battery fire fears beat blackouts – Katy, Texas (54 opposition score)

  • No story sent a chill down my spine this year like what happened in Katy, a small city outside of Houston, where fears fomented after a battery storage fire near San Diego, California, led to such a strong anti-battery fervor that it killed a 500 megawatt project in a blackout prone area.
  • Why? At the vote to reject the project, Katy City Councilor Gina Hicks, voted against constructing the battery project even though she thought it would lead to blackouts. Popular will had won out so profoundly she felt as a “public servant” she had to vote no.
  • “I feel like this is a mob vote,” she said at the October council vote. “Just know that we as a community chose this and I will represent what the community wants versus what I feel is personally best for this decision.”
  • I chose Katy over the San Diego fight because it demonstrated how quickly a kernel of truth — rare but possible battery fires — can ricochet across social media and prompt action in other parts of the country.
Yellow

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Trump Asked to Kill Wyoming Wind Projects for Eagles

Conservationists in Wyoming zero in on a vulnerability anti-wind activists are targeting elsewhere: the administration’s species protection efforts.

Eagles and wind turbines in Wyoming.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Wildlife conservationists in Wyoming are asking the Trump administration to block wind projects in their state in the name of protecting eagles from turbine blades.

The Albany County Conservancy, a Wyoming wildlife advocacy group, sent letters on February 11 and 18 to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Attorney General Pam Bondi. In the letters, which I obtained, the group asked the Trump officials to do everything in their power to halt Repsol’s Rail Tie and BluEarth’s Two Rivers wind projects, including suspending Two Rivers’ right-of-way from the Bureau of Land Management and even the interconnection grant for Rail Tie’s transmission line.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

A Hail Mary Kansas Lawsuit Against the IRA

And more of the week’s top conflicts around renewable energy.

A Hail Mary Kansas Lawsuit Against the IRA
  1. Jackson County, Kansas — We’ve been covering anti-renewable lawsuits in the Trump 2.0 era closely at The Fight. But we now have a champion for the most aggressive lawsuit yet: a case filed against a single solar project intended to somehow kill … the entire Inflation Reduction Act?
    1. Three Kansas residents have gotten the support of five seasoned attorneys — including two Federalist Society alums — to sue the federal government claiming that projects benefiting from IRA tax credits should have to be reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act, and that implementation of the IRA violated the Administrative Procedures Act.
    2. Their lawsuit, which was filed days before Trump took office, cites a single NextEra project in Kansas to make its claims of tangible damages.
    3. We asked the attorneys to comment on the lawsuit, as we’re wondering if this is an opening salvo before a broader legal effort to challenge IRA implementation.
    4. It’s worth saying this is obviously a huge ask of the administration, even in the Trump era. Not to mention it’s unclear how this legal complaint will fare with Trump’s decision to knock down NEPA implementing regulations (more on that in our Policy Watch section). But at a minimum, this is a noteworthy and novel attempt at what some may argue is a nuisance lawsuit — and indicates how conservative legal experts are finding common cause with disgruntled neighbors of renewables projects.
  2. St. James Parish, Louisiana — A state judge ruled this week that St. James Parish lawfully rejected what is believed to be one of the state’s largest solar projects.
    1. The Parish Council last year denied D.E. Shaw Renewables’ St. James Solar Energy Center which was supposed to connect to an Entergy substation as part of that utility’s solar and wind project pipeline.
    2. The rejection however came after years of local resistance to the project. D.E. Shaw took them to court after the most recent denial. But now they’ve lost, with a state judge ruling this week that they’ve failed to prove the council had good reason to say no.
    3. It’s a potential bad omen for Entergy’s efforts to complete the largest renewables expansion in state history.
  3. Alaska — We’ve never talked about Alaska here at The Fight but it’s time to do so, because renewables projects are having trouble up North.
    1. Renewable IPP is pulling the plug on a large solar project in Nikiski, a village southwest of Anchorage, citing uncertainty around federal funding and tax credits.
    2. The remote city of Kotzebue is trying to develop wind turbines to move its grid off of fossil fuels. But its money is tied up in the Trump funding freeze.
    3. Why am I watching this so closely? Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy is quietly pro renewables. Its broader effort to use “all of the above” to market his state’s relevance in energy markets and its minerals tied to the energy transition.

Here’s what else I’m watching …

In Massachusetts, anti-wind activist Mary Chalke is running for a seat on the select board for the town of Nantucket. She’s well known for wearing a whale costume to protests.

Keep reading...Show less
Policy Watch

What Trump’s NEPA Wrecking Ball Means for Renewables

And more of the week’s top policy news.

Environmental review, mapped.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. New NEPA world – The Trump White House overnight effectively rescinded all implementing rules for the National Environmental Policy Act, a key statute long relied on by regulators for permitting large energy and infrastructure projects.

  • What does this mean for renewables developers? Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles told me today that even though fewer regulations sounds nice, Trump’s implementation strategy is unlikely to ease minds on renewables permits.
  • A big reason is confusion. Litigation that anti-renewables advocates filed against Biden’s permits will be considered under the previous NEPA regulations, while Boyles expects regulators to use a new attempt at NEPA implementation in an uneven way that privileges fossil fuels projects.
  • An example is “cumulative impacts,” a term historically used by agencies to look at comprehensive environmental impacts under NEPA. Previous challenges to the cumulative impacts of renewables projects will continue; meanwhile, the new Trump memo scrapped the definition of the term and dissuaded agencies from using it. What Boyles told me is this will simply put more discretion at the hands of political officials in permitting agencies.
  • “When you get rid of the definition, you’re going to still have a fight,” she said. “You now no longer have that common basis of understanding of what is a definition.”
  • When I first asked Boyles to tell me what comes next, she started hysterically laughing: “I’m not laughing because it’s a bad question. I think it’s a question that everybody’s asking.”
  • Heatmap’s Katie Brigham has a deeper dive on the Trump rule withdrawal here.

2. Our hydrogen hero – Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Shelley Moore Capito this week came out against any freeze for a hydrogen hub with projects in her state, indicating that any clampdown on H2 projects from the federal level may get Republican pushback.

Keep reading...Show less