The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Hotspots

Trump Cancels Key Meeting for Vineyard Wind Expansion

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

Renewable energy conflicts map.
Heatmap Illustration

1. Dukes County, Massachusetts – The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management canceled a key meeting required for the environmental review of Vineyard Offshore’s expansion into the New York bight, in what appears to be the first time the agency has publicly canceled offshore wind review meetings for projects in the Atlantic Ocean since Trump took office.

  • BOEM had previously canceled a meeting for offshore wind leases in the Pacific. But this new move, which was announced late Tuesday evening, indicates the administration is not only limiting final approvals for new offshore wind leases but also procedural steps historically done in the permitting process for individual projects.
  • BOEM published a notice it would start the environmental impact statement process for the Vineyard Mid-Atlantic project in the final days of the Biden administration. The project would generate more than 2 gigawatts of power, according to the agency.
  • In a brief public statement, the agency said it was canceling virtual meetings for the environmental impact statement that were scheduled today. BOEM cited Trump’s executive order targeting offshore wind that paused “new or renewed approvals, rights-of-way, permits, leases, or loans for offshore wind projects” – at least until the government does a purported review of the offshore wind industry.
  • What’s unclear still is why this executive order triggered canceled meetings. How is a gathering for comment considered an approval or a permit? Does this mean BOEM’s putting a stop to any and all staff activity related to offshore wind?
  • I asked BOEM these questions and I will let you know if I hear back. Based on what we’re hearing is going on at other agencies, this doesn’t bode well for wind developers.

2. San Luis Obispo County, California – The ballooning Moss Landing battery fire PR crisis is now impacting other battery projects in the surrounding area.

  • Origis Energy’s Caballero battery storage project in San Luis Obispo is now facing fierce local opposition citing the Moss Landing event, with residents calling for their own temporary battery storage moratoria.
  • The catch is, Caballero’s construction is near completion after being approved by county regulators three years ago. According to local TV station KEYT, county supervisors have declined to take up requests to block the project “particularly due to potential litigation the county could face if they were to try and reverse the approval.”
  • I’m watching the backlash to Moss Landing spread outside of California, too.
  • The town of Duanesburg, New York, last week banned battery storage facilities within its municipal limits, with officials referencing the battery fire on the West Coast to make the case these facilities are somehow a hazard to public health and the environment.

3. Marshall County, Indiana – We have what might be the wildest moratorium we’ve seen passed so far in Fight history: a ban on solar farms, carbon capture, battery storage, and data centers – all at once!

  • Marshall County commissioners enacted the 2-year moratorium on all these tech facilities earlier this week unanimously in a quick vote. It is the first time I have found decarb facilities banned by a county in tandem with data centers.

Here’s what else we’re keeping tabs on…

In Alabama, a new Silicon Ranch solar proposal in Montgomery County is running into local ire (which is predictable at this point in this region).

In Louisiana, Ascension is getting grilled by residents near a carbon capture test well.

In Massachusetts, National Grid canceled a geothermal heating pilot project.

In Michigan, Ranger Power’s solar project in Tuscola County is facing some familiar “prime farmland” criticism.

In Nebraska, Midwest Electric Cooperative Corp. won a permit from Perkins County commissioners to build a solar project.

In North Carolina, NextEra Energy’s Muscov solar project is reportedly facing delays due to local opposition.

In Wisconsin, Invenergy’s solar project in Janesville is facing concerns from the local state representative – who is a Democrat.

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

How the Tax Bill Is Empowering Anti-Renewables Activists

A war of attrition is now turning in opponents’ favor.

Massachusetts and solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Library of Congress, Getty Images

A solar developer’s defeat in Massachusetts last week reveals just how much stronger project opponents are on the battlefield after the de facto repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Last week, solar developer PureSky pulled five projects under development around the western Massachusetts town of Shutesbury. PureSky’s facilities had been in the works for years and would together represent what the developer has claimed would be one of the state’s largest solar projects thus far. In a statement, the company laid blame on “broader policy and regulatory headwinds,” including the state’s existing renewables incentives not keeping pace with rising costs and “federal policy updates,” which PureSky said were “making it harder to finance projects like those proposed near Shutesbury.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Midwest Is Becoming Even Tougher for Solar Projects

And more on the week’s most important conflicts around renewables.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Wells County, Indiana – One of the nation’s most at-risk solar projects may now be prompting a full on moratorium.

  • Late last week, this county was teed up to potentially advance a new restrictive solar ordinance that would’ve cut off zoning access for large-scale facilities. That’s obviously bad for developers. But it would’ve still allowed solar facilities up to 50 acres and grandfathered in projects that had previously signed agreements with local officials.
  • However, solar opponents swamped the county Area Planning Commission meeting to decide on the ordinance, turning it into an over four-hour display in which many requested in public comments to outright ban solar projects entirely without a grandfathering clause.
  • It’s clear part of the opposition is inflamed over the EDF Paddlefish Solar project, which we ranked last year as one of the nation’s top imperiled renewables facilities in progress. The project has already resulted in a moratorium in another county, Huntington.
  • Although the Paddlefish project is not unique in its risks, it is what we view as a bellwether for the future of solar development in farming communities, as the Fort Wayne-adjacent county is a picturesque display of many areas across the United States. Pro-renewables advocates have sought to tamp down opposition with tactics such as a direct text messaging campaign, which I previously scooped last week.
  • Yet despite the counter-communications, momentum is heading in the other direction. At the meeting, officials ultimately decided to punt a decision to next month so they could edit their draft ordinance to assuage aggrieved residents.
  • Also worth noting: anyone could see from Heatmap Pro data that this county would be an incredibly difficult fight for a solar developer. Despite a slim majority of local support for renewable energy, the county has a nearly 100% opposition risk rating, due in no small part to its large agricultural workforce and MAGA leanings.

2. Clark County, Ohio – Another Ohio county has significantly restricted renewable energy development, this time with big political implications.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

How a Heatmap Reader Beat a Battery Storage Ban

A conversation with Jeff Seidman, a professor at Vassar College.

Jeffrey Seidman.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Jeff Seidman, a professor at Vassar College and an avid Heatmap News reader. Last week Seidman claimed a personal victory: he successfully led an effort to overturn a moratorium on battery storage development in the town of Poughkeepsie in Hudson Valley, New York. After reading a thread about the effort he posted to BlueSky, I reached out to chat about what my readers might learn from his endeavors – and how they could replicate them, should they want to.

The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow