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
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