The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Spotlight

The CBD’s Tortoise Threat

The conservationist group thinks it has the goods on the Bureau of Land Management’s new Western solar plan.

Tortoise
Alexander Mils / Getty Images / Heatmap

The Biden administration is trying to open a lot more Western territory to utility-scale solar. But they are facing a conservationist backlash that may be aided by the views of scientists within the federal government.

Yesterday, activists pushed back against the environmental review of the Bureau of Land Management’s new Western solar plan that would make more than 31 million acres available for utility-scale solar applications across 11 states. The BLM is trying to meet the next two decades of demand for renewable electricity while avoiding the kinds of environmental and social conflicts that stymie individual projects. But it appears key stakeholders filed protests against the environmental review, including counties that would host new solar farms and Republican politicians, as well as the whistleblower advocacy group PEER we wrote about last week.

Today, however, we’re going to focus on the protest filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, which submitted to BLM what amounted to the contours of a lawsuit.

The protest argued the environmental review of the plan not only failed to adequately protect the Mojave desert tortoise – a species protected as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act – but appeared to make “arbitrary” decisions to open potential tortoise habitat and travel areas. Per the protest, the review did so without clearly explaining how it took into account guidance from the Fish and Wildlife Service, the primary species protection agency.

Zooming in, scientists at the Service said in a power-point presentation dated April of this year (that CBD happily pointed out is available online) they supported excluding occupied tortoise habitat and translocation sites from the solar plan. Employees at the Service also gave CBD guidance documents they submitted over the past year to the Bureau that outlined “extensive criteria for exclusion” that activists say were not followed and weren’t reflected in the review documents previously released by the government.

Why does this matter? Well, it could determine whether the decisions relevant can hold up in court. CBD is using the word “arbitrary” because it’s a standard followed under the Administrative Procedures Act, which forces government officials to show their work and demonstrate they considered all available information submitted to them.

CBD’s Patrick Donnelly – who we spoke with at length in our first edition of The Fight – authored the protest filing. Donnelly told me the acreage relevant to the tortoises totals only about 200,000 acres of the almost 12 million that would be available for solar under the plan, so the grievance shouldn’t be a herculean endeavor to address.

“We’re trying to go into the protest process with an open mind, not cynically,” he told me, “and make this plan a lot less harmful.”

Still, if CBD escalates, the Bureau will have to show how it went from getting these recommendations to landing on the acreage it opened to solar. It could also shake the certainty of developers with applications within the solar plan area already dealing with tortoise protection advocates on the individual project level, like EDF Renewables’ Bonanza Solar project north of Las Vegas which has a draft environmental review in public comment.

Proving a government decision is arbitrary requires demonstrating the move was not “reasonable and justifiable,” Ankur Tohan, an attorney at K&L Gates, told me. Usually the bar for the government to prove itself is “relatively low,” and courts are “very deferential to an agency” as long as “the agency’s action took into account the relevant factors.” The problems arise for the government if “the internal analysis is contradictory,” Tohan said.

Personally I’m having trouble figuring out how the Service’s initial recommendations were internalized at BLM – though I am assuming they were handled in some way, as otherwise the Service would presumably stand in the way. BLM does acknowledge that “design features and project guidelines” were modified to “better avoid impacts to species where not excluded” and said developers “shall configure solar development projects to maintain existing desert tortoise habitat.”

I asked BLM to explain this, but they declined to answer questions on the matter. “The BLM has no comment at this time,” BLM press secretary Brian Hires said, citing the need to “review all protests.” So I guess we’ll have to wait and see!

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
Q&A

How Developers Should Think of the New IRA Credit Rules

A conversation with Scott Cockerham of Latham and Watkins.

How Developers Should Think of the New IRA Credit Rules
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Scott Cockerham, a partner with the law firm Latham and Watkins whose expertise I sought to help me best understand the Treasury Department’s recent guidance on the federal solar and wind tax credits. We focused on something you’ve probably been thinking about a lot: how to qualify for the “start construction” part of the new tax regime, which is the primary hurdle for anyone still in the thicket of a fight with local opposition.

The following is our chat lightly edited for clarity. Enjoy.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

An Influential Anti-ESG Activist Targets A Wind Farm

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

Map of renewable energy fights.
Heatmap Illustration

1. Carroll County, Arkansas – The head of an influential national right-wing advocacy group is now targeting a wind project in Arkansas, seeking federal intervention to block something that looked like it would be built.

  • Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, recently called on the Trump administration to intervene against the development of Scout Clean Energy’s Nimbus wind project in Arkansas. Consumers’ Research is known as one of the leading anti-ESG advocacy organizations, playing a key role in the “anti-woke” opposition against the climate- and socially-conscious behavior of everyone from utilities to Anheuser-Busch.
  • In a lengthy rant posted to X earlier this month, Hild pointed to Carroll County’s local moratorium on wind projects and claimed Nimbus being built would be “a massive win for ESG radicals – and a slap in the face for local democracy.”
  • As I told you in April, the Nimbus project prompted Carroll County to enact the moratorium but it was grandfathered in because of contracts signed prior to the ban’s enactment.
  • However, even though Nimbus is not sited on federal land, there is a significant weak point for the project: its potential impacts on endangered birds and bats.
  • Scout Clean Energy has been working with the Fish and Wildlife Service since at least 2018 under Trump 1.0. However, the project’s habitat conservation plan was not completed before the start of the current Trump term and Scout did not submit an application for Nimbus to receive an incidental take permit from the Service until May of this year.
  • Enter the Trump administration’s bird-centric wind power crackdown and the impact of Hild’s commentary comes into fuller focus. What will happen to all the years of work that Scout and the Service did? It’s unclear how the project reckons with this heightened scrutiny and risk of undue federal attention.

2. Suffolk County, New York – EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin this week endorsed efforts by activists on Long Island to oppose energy storage in their neighborhoods.

Keep reading...Show less
Spotlight

Trump’s Permit Freeze Prompts Some Solar to Eye Exits

Is there going to be a flight out of Nevada?

Solar in Nevada.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Donald Trump’s renewables permitting freeze is prompting solar companies to find an escape hatch from Nevada.

As I previously reported, the Interior Department has all but halted new approvals for solar and wind projects on federal lands. It was entirely unclear how that would affect transmission out west, including in the solar-friendly Nevada desert where major lines were in progress to help power both communities and a growing number of data centers. Shortly after the pause, I took notice of the fact that regulators quietly delayed the timetable by at least two weeks for a key line – the northern portion of NV Energy’s Greenlink project – that had been expected to connect to a litany of solar facilities. Interior told me it still planned to complete the project in September, but it also confirmed that projects specifically necessary for connecting solar onto the grid would face “enhanced” reviews.

Keep reading...Show less