The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Q&A

Do Community Benefit Agreements Actually Work?

A conversation with Matilda Krieder of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory

•
Do Community Benefit Agreements Actually Work?

This week I spoke with Matilda Krieder, a researcher at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, about a database she and her colleagues released this week showing how onshore and offshore wind developers use community benefit agreements – a form of compact aimed at improving local benefits from projects. We talked about whether communities really see the agreements as helpful or if there’s a better way.

The following is an abridged version of our conversation edited for clarity and space:

How much have you heard from people concerned that community benefit agreements are a form of financial influence or a false promise where they don’t receive real benefits?

I haven’t heard very much about the not-receiving end of things — and the reason I’ll say that is at least on the land-based wind side, an actual community benefit agreement is pretty uncommon. The vast majority of the time it’s just donations. And that, I think, is less likely to have the false promise thing because developers are handing over a one-time check, so there’s not really a perception that it won’t come to fruition.

So walk me through what your research shows with respect to how effective community benefit agreements are in assuaging local opposition to a project?

Unfortunately my research is not super helpful there. Because we didn’t look at failed projects, I don’t think I can say anything about whether [community benefit agreements] help or not.

But the existing literature that other people have done is not really positive on the connection between community benefits and improving community perception of projects, which is really interesting to me because I think people in the U.S. are really buying into it. Especially for offshore wind. So much pressure is being put on community benefits agreements as the thing that’ll change everything. And I support developers giving them, even if it doesn’t change anything, because it’s a net good. But I do wonder if developers or anybody setting regulations are reading what’s been studied. If so, I don’t know if they’d be putting all their eggs in this basket.

Okay then what if you walked me through the benefits you’ve found, at least in wind?

So it’s very different from offshore wind to land-based wind. In offshore wind, we’re seeing huge amounts of money, especially in the communities that host cable landings for the projects, because that’s the only point in offshore wind where the local government has any way to stop or change the way the project is developed. The cable landing is where you’re seeing $150 million [contributions]. And that hasn’t been happening long enough to measure the impacts of school funding or taxes over time.

The agreements that are more likely to be impactful are the ones that are more specific. I point to the Salem offshore wind terminal as a positive example because it’s such specific funding. You can tell they did the work to understand what the community’s priorities were and they directed funding to those areas.

In terms of land-based wind, it would be up to who you talk to. I’ve talked to county commissioners who’ve spoken really positively about the things that would be considered small potatoes. Not millions of dollars but directed funding in a specific way that met the community’s priorities and that changed people’s perception of the project. That’s a very small sample size, so you can’t identify a trend there, but I think it has potential.

I’m starting to view the donation side more positively than a lot of people too because a community benefit agreement most of the time is going to the local government, [and] a lot of people distrust their local government.

So instead, donations directly to services instead of county or local governments?

Yeah. That’s just a function of how in agreements, 95% of the funding goes to a local government. And people may not ever know what happens to it after that. It’s less visible.

What are you hearing from communities about community benefit agreements then?

I hear, how do we get one? The problem is, it’s still entirely in the developers’ hands so sometimes I feel a bit limited in the advice I can give to get one. It kind of comes down to what leverage you have with a developer.

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

The New Push for Underwater Data Centers

Exploratory projects are making a splash in Maine and Alaska.

•
Wires and water.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A legal brawl is brewing over what could be the nation’s first underwater data centers.

Two subsidiaries of a new LLC named DeepGreen have applied for “preliminary” permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that would give four years of permission for studies and analysis towards constructing underwater data centers off remote coastlines in Maine and Alaska. The data centers as proposed would be powered entirely by tidal energy, as in, the power of waves themselves – a technological innovation from hydropower still being piloted around the world. Project descriptions submitted to FERC lay out what these data centers would look like in broad strokes: hundreds of hydrokinetic turbines, dozens of underwater “data center pods,” and miles of subsea cable. The permits would not authorize construction, which would need its own lengthy review process. But these early green lights would tee both areas up for years of potential conflict over hypotheticals that feel real to those on the ground.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Solar Opponents Begging Trump to Intervene in Michigan

And more of the week’s biggest fights around project development

•
The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Ottawa County, Michigan – A congressional district House Democrats are targeting for control of the Lower Chamber is now a battleground over solar development on farmland, and I’m waiting to see if President Trump gets involved.

  • On Sept. 24, the Michigan township of Zeeland wrote a letter to the president – and reportedly Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins – requesting the federal government intervene in the development of RWE’s utility-scale Silver Maple Solar project. The letter to Trump which is public requests the president visit Zeeland and the project site to “provide an opportunity to meet directly with local farmers, business owners, elected officials, and residents who are living with the consequences of the poor policies you are fighting against.”
  • Shortly thereafter, Zeeland Township supervisor Kerri Bosma, who authored the letter, met with Rep. Bill Huizenga and presented him with a copy of the letter. “Thank you for reaching out Kerri and keep up the fight against this Lansing big government takeover!” Huizenga said on Facebook. Huizenga’s office did not respond to a request for comment on how they would support this request further.
  • This is remarkable because local officials are beckoning for Trump to arrive at a time when he’s historically unpopular and Huizenga’s congressional district is one being targeted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in this year’s midterm elections as a priority. Maybe this is about ginning up partisan red meat, as Huizenga’s opponent, State Sen. Sean McCann, has been publicly supportive of more solar development in agricultural communities.
  • Locals appear most irate with the state permitting primacy law which allows the state regulator, Michigan Public Service Commission, to supersede local opposition toward renewable energy projects. So far, the legality of that power is withstanding court challenges, and it’s unclear to me how the federal government could in any way stall this large solar farm aside from helping out in that legal effort on behalf of localities.
  • Clearly, RWE is confident they can go ahead – they just resubmitted their application to build the project with the MPSC, citing the primacy law’s survival in the courts.

2. Texas – The Lone Star State sure is action-packed right now, huh? Let’s break down a few of the most important fights.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

Why the Senate Permitting Bill Isn’t a ‘Grand Bargain’

A conversation with Josh Freed of Third Way

•
Josh Freed.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is about the big energy policy story of the week – month? year? – which is the new bipartisan permitting deal in the U.S. Senate. As my colleagues and I were feverishly working on our mega-explainer about the bill, I rang up Josh Freed, founder of Third Way’s energy and climate program, who graciously picked up the phone despite traveling in London. Freed, a fellow energy wonk-slash-musician, was gracious to jam out with me on all the things I felt you needed to know about this bill – including whether there really is only one shot to get what he believes would be landmark legislation into law.

The following chat was lightly abridged for clarity. Let’s dive in.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow