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

Democrats’ Growing Divide Over Data Centers

It’s pause vs pause-nots.

Data center protests.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The American climate movement is beginning to look a lot like AI doomers versus the techno-optimists. It’s a dynamic that is winning local bans – and very little else for now.

On one side, you’ve got the left-leaning insurgent grassroots movement against data centers. In many cases this push is in the name of climate action and environmental justice, with activists citing the risks of pollution from gas-fired power and the potential for strain on existing electricity supplies. But in many, many other cases, this movement is decidedly not about climate action; instead it’s a movement addressing everything from energy prices and power over large corporations to AI use generally.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Local Police Targeted Data Center Opponent, Law Firm Alleges

And more of the week’s top news around development fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Jefferson County, Alabama – A law firm is alleging that police in the city of Birmingham retaliated against a woman for suing developers of a data center. It might just be a wake-up call for data center developers.

  • Earlier this month, two individuals each with homes next to a proposed 300-megawatt data center in Birmingham filed a class action lawsuit against developer Nebius and the city of Birmingham. The lawsuit alleges “multiple independently fatal zoning violations” rooted in the city’s decision to let Nebius’s project move forward while also finalizing a moratorium, and claims the city has granted approvals in violation of the existing moratorium.
  • On May 18, days after the lawsuit was filed, lawyers for one of the individuals – Madelyn Greene – wrote the Birmingham Police Department stating officers pulled her over while driving through the proposed project site without any lawful reason. According to the letter, which I obtained and was first reported by AL.com, the officers claimed she was harassing police and started filming her while in her car. When she took her own phone out, the officers “abruptly broke off contact, returned to their vehicles, and left the scene.”
  • The letter concludes the traffic stop “timing and location are not coincidental.” It warned that any additional attempts by city police to “stop, detain, surveil, follow, photograph, intimidate, or otherwise harass” people involved in the lawsuit will result in requests for restraining orders.
  • Situations like these vividly illustrate the problems around security forces and large infrastructure projects. Activists fighting the Thacker Pass lithium mine in Nevada were monitored for years. Conflicts between police and oil pipeline protestors are common and complaints about surveillance abound.
  • I feel compelled to say that data center developers and large tech firms would be wise to coordinate with local police on matters such as these – not just for their own benefit but for that of the public. It’s one thing when protesters are arrested at a hearing, but wholly another when members of the public are concerned voicing dissent will lead to retaliation. All that’ll do is aggravate the opposition further.
  • Nebius did not respond to a request for comment.

2. Mason County, Kentucky – This county is the site of yet another eminent domain debacle and I suggest you pay attention to it because it’s now represented by an outgoing congressman with nothing left to lose: Thomas Massie.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

What’s Bothering a Free Market Wonk About the Data Center Boom

A conversation with Travis Fisher of the Cato Institute.

Travis Fisher.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Travis Fisher, an energy policy analyst with the Cato Institute and one of my favorite people to chop it up with on Energy Twitter. I reached out to Fisher for a conversation about how he’s approaching the data center boom as a free market-minded wonk at a time when other figures on the so-called Right are calling for strict regulations on the sector. What I learned is that folks like Fisher are concerned about the scale of the buildout too, but their ideas and approaches wildly differ from the Tucker Carlsons of the world.

As always, our conversation was edited for length and clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow