As the bulldozers roll, energy developer BrightSource and the Center for Biological Diversity announce they have reached an agreement.
For Immediate Release, October 22, 2010
Contact:
Kierán Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity, (520) 275-5960
Kristin Hunter, BrightSource Energy, (415) 281-7161Center for Biological Diversity and BrightSource Commit to Desert Protections
TUCSON, Ariz.— The Center for Biological Diversity and BrightSource Energy, Inc. reached an agreement today to provide additional protections for the desert tortoise and other rare species affected by the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System project in the Mojave Desert.
Under the terms of the agreement, BrightSource will arrange for the acquisition and/or enhancement of thousands of acres of desert tortoise and other desert habitat. The specific lands identified for acquisition and/or enhancement will be made public when agreements are completed with the willing sellers.
“This agreement will provide important additional protections for the desert tortoise and other sensitive species in the area affected by this project, above and beyond what was required by the state and federal agencies that recently approved it,” said Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center, which will receive no money or other compensation from the agreement.
“With world-class sun and rich biological diversity, the Mojave Desert is a vital resource to California and our nation,” said John Woolard, President and CEO of BrightSource Energy. “From the start of this project, we have focused on reducing its impact by implementing an environmentally responsible technology. We’re pleased to work with the Center to enhance the project by ensuring additional protections for desert tortoise and other habitat.”
Following a three year permitting process, the U.S. Department of the Interior and the State of California approved the 370-megawatt project earlier this month. The project entails approximately 3,500 acres of public land in San Bernardino County.
“The desert tortoise is an irreplaceable member of the Mojave Desert ecosystem that has been struggling to survive for decades against an onslaught of threats ranging from loss of habitat, cattle grazing, off-road vehicles, disease, and now, the effects of global warming. Today’s agreement will provide the tortoise significant additional relief,” said Suckling.
BrightSource and the Center agree that the California and Nevada desert ecosystems are nationally important and must be better managed and protected. The Center and BrightSource are committed to working to ensure that future utility-scale solar projects are sited thoughtfully to avoid conflict and achieve the mutual goals of preserving species habitat, meeting the need for climate protection, and rapidly transitioning the U.S. away from fossil fuels.
World-class sun? Did he really use that phrase. Oy.
CBDFail!
It would be nice to know if CBD’s decision was based on PR/funding considerations, or if they assessed the grounds for a lawsuit to be weak. If the latter, then wringing the last bit of concessions out of BrightSource makes sense. But I have my suspicions that it was the former, and I’m not sure what CBD could do to quell them. I’m sure they can’t make any public statements on the deal, beyond this press release. Could the deal itself even be made public?
I wonder what “working to ensure that future utility-scale solar projects are sited thoughtfully” entails? I notice the absence of the word “together” in that sentence. Would BrightSource give CBD the opportunity to veto particular sites for future projects? What would be their incentive, now that CBD has rolled over?
And if BrightSource is so goddamned eager to work with conservation organizations to avoid conflict and work toward “mutual” goals, why didn’t they do that before they chose this horrible location?
They’re going to buy and “enhance” private land as mitigation?
Privately owned East Mojave tortoise habitat?
I doubt much exists.
Boy if Ivanpah SEGS is an example of “thoughtful siting” and this is wahat they mean by cooperation, the future will be bleak indeed for the inhabitants of the Mojave, both plant and animal.
In other news today, BrightSource and Reliant Energy aka NRG, reached a last minute agreemnet for Reliant to cough up $300,000,000 in funding for the Ivanpah project.
It’s amazing how all these last minute deals come out right at groundbreaking.
Morongobill
On second thought, and trying to see a silver lining here, I wonder if BrightSource is now spending as much money on mitigation as Abengoa is spending to build on private, truly degraded lands.
BrightSource is spending $33,909,523 for 2,966 acres which is $9,466 per acre, for compensatory mitigation for the tortoise.
Is it our friend Terry Weiner who has said, “Mother Nature doesn’t take checks”?
Looks like I was over-generous in trying to imagine a “pure” motive for CBD’s move…
CBD’s Facebook page accepts wall posts from friends, by the way.
Sven, right on. I was wondering where they would find this land, particularly if it has to come from “willing sellers” (a political requisite). But also—perhaps this is over-the-top paranoid—it says they will “arrange for acquisition,” not that they, BS, will buy land. What does that mean? Or does the passivity run so deep among some of the participants in the press release that things just naturally come off in passive voice.
Janine, its corporate-speak. It means they’re making them an offer they can’t refuse. Also our society, its voices and analyses are passive. And putting things in the passive rather than active voice means no one has to say you’re sorry. Also in to calls to CBD Sr. Lawyer Lisa Belenky I w as surprised that she a). denied the preesence of geoglyphs ithin the fotprint of Blythe Solar, and b). said with regard to Tortoise abuse at Ivanpah, “It’s not the worst I’ve seen.“With friends like that…
“Assisted by deep-pocketed backers like Bechtel, Google and Morgan Stanley, BrightSource seems determined to press forward with its 370-megawatt Ivanpah plant no matter what happens on the policy front.”
from New York Times article 10/28 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/business/energy-environment/29solar.html?nl=&emc=a25
When I read Woody’s article, I wondered how he knew 9 projects in CA and AZ were expected to be under construction by year’s end. Six have been approved in CA (and more may be), there are three active projects in AZ, none of which has been approved. Did the BLM give him a number, or is he extrapolating?
Sorry, the Todd Woody article I was referring to is the one Swan linked on his or her comment, above mine.
Good question. The implication of the quote I put in there was that they were just going to do it anyway. If you just put that question on the comments section of the times it’ll just get lost. Anybody got an email for this writer?
ps janine - i’m a her . . .
Let’s see, this looks familiar. BrightSource is buying habitat that already exists, but isn’t protected, even though it should be under federal law because endangered species habitat merits protection. Now that’s sensible. Glad we have such intelligent people operating Center for BioDiversity. Thanks.
This is why I’ve been pushing the Solar Roadways project on anyone who will listen:
http://www.solarroadways.com
1) Where is most of our electricity used? The cities.
2) Where is most of our pavement (roads, parking lots, etc.)? The cities.
3) Instead of laying waste to wilderness, why not take the things we’ve already paved over and turn them into solar farms?
4) Generating energy where it’s used avoids wasting it by sending it hundreds if not thousands of miles over transmission lines
And a whole host of other reasons.
The DoT is interested in it. So’s GE. So are big-box retailers and fast-food outlets who are interested in giving electric-car drivers a good reason (namely, recharging facilities) to patronize their establishments.
The one holdup, the transparent surface strong enough and cheap enough to be used in a large-scale application, may already have been solved thanks (ironically) to Shell’s plant-based Floraphalte: http://www.shell.com/home/content/bitumen/products/shell_floraphalte/ Mix it with clear glass, put it in parking lots, and use it while working on developing something that can stand up to interstate usage.
Let’s make it happen, so we don’t see any
I’ sorry that CBD has gone down the road of NRDC and the Sierra Club. That takes a lot of hope away.
As far as buying private land. It does NOT work to do that. For the Palen Solar Power Project, the applicant, Solar Millennium, claims to have ID’ed 60 parcels of private land that could be bought to “mitigate” the loss of Mojave fringe-toed lizard habitat. Big problem is, they don’t know if all the landowners want to sell. Another issue is that just because land is privately owned does not eant that it will be developed. I own 160 acres of tortoise habitat (inholding) in the Mojave Presere. Only 1/4 acre of that is disturbed. I have no intention of developing it or selling it. It recieves better protection from me than the Park Service because I do not allow “varmint hunting” and the NPS does. If I sell it to them, it gets opened to coyote hunters. How is that a win/win?
Without trying to start an arguement, I have worked with CBD in the past and would like to say that the people I knew all wanted to make an attempt to take down the Ivanpah project. These people included Lisa Belenky and Ileene Anderson. I feel a bit funny using their names, but I think people should know that this decision came from the top.
I would like to know definitively and clearly with citations what funds exchanged hands between the applicants and the NRDC, Sierra Club and CBD. Can anyone help provide this information?
Thanks!
You can look at groups’ 990’s on guidestar.org, although the Public Disclosure version may be all that’s posted, and that has to show amounts but does not have to show donors.
A founder of NRDC is the new Chair of Bright Source.
http://greenenergyreporter.com/renewables/solar/brightsource-names-nrdc-founder-sce-head-bryson-chairman/