Mojave Desert Blog

Mr James Andre, an expert in desert research who Tessera Solar sought to ban from the Calico Solar evidentiary hearings, submitted a written brief to the California Energy Commission (CEC) in which he recommends that State and Federal agencies provide incentives to Tessera Solar to find a less harmful location for the energy project. One of the most poignant portions of the brief submitted to the CEC commissioners reminds them of their burden to avoid shortcuts, and think of policy solutions that can accommodate the competing demands of "clean" energy and a sustainable and healthy Mojave Desert ecosystm: Mr. Andre wrote: "As the decision-making body for this and subsequent utility-scale solar energy projects, the Commission becomes our representative to future generations." Mr. Andre argues that the Calico Solar site is of high ecological value for several reasons that represent his expertise in botany: Tessera Solar's survey method for the White-margin

The California Energy Commission (CEC) just posted notice that it will be continuing evidentiary hearings on 25 August, which will likely push back its 24 August deadline to issue the Presiding Member's Proposed Decision, per my previous post .   It's not clear how much longer it will take for the CEC to wrap up the evidentiary hearings and issue the proposed decision, but the CEC is under pressure to make a decision soon since Tessera Solar would need to break ground by the end of the year to qualify for public financing under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

I need to correct the record on this blog.  In two previous posts ( 7 August and 12 August ) I updated you on the evidentiary hearings for the Calico Solar power project, in which the company proposing the project--Tessera Solar--sought to bar the testimony of a respected desert botanist named Jim Andre.  The company argued that he signed a confidentiality agreement when he helped other experts understand how to spot rare plant life on the proposed Calico solar site. I had downloaded and reviewed the transcripts for the 4 and 6 August hearings and concluded that he did not testify since he was not among the witnesses in those hearings.  I assumed that Tessera Solar had succeeded in buying the silence of the public's natural resources expert.  However, the California Energy Commission just posted the transcripts for the 5 August hearing, at which Mr. Andre did in fact testify, despite the objections of Tessera Solar. This comes as quite a relief since the energy company's at

I had previously posted on studies investigating the effectiveness of translocating desert tortoises to other parts of the Mojave Desert to take them out of "harm's way."   In 2008, Fort Irwin began relocating tortoises from Mojave Desert habitat that would soon become part of the base's training area.  The full Fort Irwin report on desert tortoise mortalities from base activities indicates that 200 desert tortoises were killed and 6 were injured in 2008, the vast majority of those were translocated tortoises. The report was provided to the California Energy Commission (CEC) as evidence to be used in the CEC's assessment of the proposed Calico Solar power project .  If the solar project is approved, Tessera Solar LLC--the company proposing the project--would likely translocate dozens of tortoises currently inhabiting the area.   Based on the Fort Irwin translocation experience, the approval of large solar projects is essentially a death sentence for tortoises.

It was a very unfortunate day for Mojave Desert Racing and Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) recreationists with this weekend's tragic accident in the Johnson Valley OHV area.  As much as I prefer my pristine desert wilderness, I understand that off-road vehicle enthusiasts ultimately share a love for the open space and freedom afforded by the Mojave.  The media tends to paint OHV enthusiasts as the arch nemesis of environmentalists (and vice versa),  but there is middle ground, and hopefully that will not be ignored during the coverage of this tragedy.  It is true that OHV recreation is incompatible with conservation.  It is a fact that OHVs damage desert lands and harm endangered wildlife.  But if enjoyed responsibly, OHV enthusiasts can have their share of the desert, and leave the rest for everyone to enjoy in its natural state.  OHV recreation is a sport that--in my opinion--has not fully matured, but neither has our management of the deserts. Some organizations may seek to take a

I'm reading The California Deserts: An Ecological Rediscovery by Bruce Pavlik.  There is a chapter on the history of human interaction with California's deserts, and Mr. Pavlik has an excerpt from the writings of John Van Dyke, a professor who visited the California deserts and in 1902 wrote: The desert has gone a-begging for a word of praise these many years.  It never had a sacred poet; it has in me only a lover. Is then this great expanse of sand and rock the beginning of the end?  Is that the way our globe shall perish? Who can say? Nature plans the life, she plans the death; it must be that she plans aright.  For death may be the culmination of all character; and life but the process of development.  If so, then not in vain these wastes of sand.  The harsh destiny, the life-long struggle which they have imposed upon all the plants and birds, and animals have been but as the stepping-stones of character... Not in vain these wastes of sand.  And this time not because

The California Energy Commission (CEC) stated during the early August evidentiary hearings for the Calico Solar power project that they planned to issue a decision on the project by the 24th of August.   As noted in previous posts ,  the Calico Solar project would consume 8,230 acres of prime desert habitat, and kill dozens of endangered desert tortoise and Mojave Fringe-toed lizard, and probably disrupt a wildlife corridor.   The site would also impact loggerhead shrike, a nearby Golden Eagle, LeConte's thrasher, and several special status plants, such as the white-margined beardtongue, small flowered androstostephium, Utah vine milkweed, and foxtail cactus.   Photo of the Calico Solar project site in the Mojave Desert, taken from the PWA report on the Calico Site hydrology and geomorphic qualities, submitted to the CEC on June 18th. During the evidentiary hearings addressing biological resources, Tessera Solar (the company proposing to build the Calico Solar project on publi

For a great write-up by Chris Clarke (and a beautiful photo by Laura Cunningham), visit Coyote Crossing .  Mr. Clarke draws a parallel between the willingness of environmental groups to sell out pristine and threatened desert habitat for the sake of "green energy," and a poor decision by the Sierra Club decades ago when it acquiesced to the Bureau of Reclamation's inundation of Glen Canyon  by constructing a dam there. While I have written on the California Energy Commission's imposition of mitigation fees on energy companies proposing to build on good quality desert habitat, the damage to the Mojave and Colorado Deserts will ultimately be irreparable.  Every poor decision made by energy companies, and approved by policymakers, will fragment our deserts until what remains is an industrial corridor with small pockets of desert that cannot sustain the rich diversity of life one can encounter in the desert now.  Watching a desert tortoise forage for wildflowers in the

According to the transcript from the 30 July prehearing conference held by the California Energy Commission (CEC) to discuss the Calico Solar power project, Tessera Solar's lawyers sought to bar one of California's prominent botany experts from testifying on behalf of concerned citizens.   Tessera Solar claimed that because they had previously paid a particular plant expert to conduct a survey of the Calico Solar site--which would be built on public lands--the expert was unable to provide testimony in the debate regarding the solar site on behalf of other citizens because of his contract.  Tessera Solar's underhanded tactics suggest energy companies may want to buy the silence of biologists to prevent the public from fully understanding the harmful impacts of the energy company projects on public lands. As energy companies rush to bulldoze open space in the Mojave Desert, they are required to conduct surveys to determine the extent of damage that would be done to plant a

If there is one bit of good news from the California Energy Commission's approval of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, it's that energy companies will pay more--millions more--if they want to build on some of the best Mojave Desert habitat.   The Ivanpah Solar site chosen by BrightSource Energy is public land managed by the BLM,  and the company's 392 Mega-Watt plant will destroy 4,000 acres of pristine Mojave Desert habitat there.   The site is home to dozens of endangered desert tortoises, and diverse array of special status and rare plants, to include the Mojave Milkweed and Parish's Club cholla cactus.   It's not clear why BrightSource Energy chose this site out of the millions of acres of potential sites across the sunny Southwest United States. Instead of abandoning the site for alternative locations of less ecological value, BrightSource Energy insisted on moving forward with it's choice of Ivanpah Valley for construction, despite the concer

According to the just-released Presiding Member's Proposed Decision, the California Energy Commission (CEC) has approved the construction and operation of BrightSource Energy's Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System in the Eastern Mojave Desert.  With the release of the decision begins a 30-day comment period.  The decision appears to uphold many of the proposed conditions of certification, to include mitigation measures that require the company to fund conservation land elsewhere in the Mojave Desert, and avoid impacts on special status plants.  As noted previously on this blog, such mitigation measures are not always successful, and we can expect the loss of desert tortoise and other desert species'.  This blog will take a closer look at the proposed decision--and its impacts on the Mojave--for a future posting.

The energy company proposing to build the Ivanpah Solar Energy Generating System (ISEGS)--BrightSource Energy--is eager for the California Energy Commission (CEC) to issue the Presiding Member's Proposed Decision on the project, according to documents available to the public.  The Presiding Member's proposed decision -- as seen with the Beacon Solar power project -- is essentially the second-to-last step before the CEC either approves or denies an energy project in California.  The decision will also reflect what sorts of conditions the energy company will have to meet in order to start construction--such as the relocation of endangered species or payment of mitigation funds to preserve desert habitat in another part of the Mojave Desert.  Once the proposed decision is issued, there is a 30 day comment period before the CEC makes it final. BrightSource Energy is in a hurry because it needs to start construction on the project before the end of 2010 in order to remain eligibl

The California Energy Commission (CEC) announced that it will hold an evidentiary hearings for the proposed Calicor Solar power project on 4 August beginning at 12 noon.  The hearings may extend into 5 and 6 August, as well.  The hearings will be held in Barstow -- details copied at the bottom of this post below.   You can also find the details at the CEC Calico Solar site here . As noted in previous posts on the Calico Solar power project, the impact of the project on wildlife in the Mojave Desert will be significant.  The site is home to dozens of desert tortoises, Mojave fringe-toed lizard, and foraging habitat for bighorn sheep.  Information for the evidentiary hearings: Wednesday, August 4, 2010, 12:00 noon, and continuing into the evening hours, if necessary. and on Thursday, August 5 and Friday, August 6, 2010, beginning each day at 9 a.m. Location: Hampton Inn & Suites Barstow 2710 Lenwood Road Barstow, CA 92311

I keep coming back to the prognosis for the passage of the California Desert Protection Act of 2010 (CDPA 2010, or S.2921) because even if I am pessimistic about its chances, I know Washington is an unpredictable arena where one has to keep an eye open for opportunities.  Part of me believes CDPA 2010 is unlikely to be considered by Congress this year.  As I've noted in previous posts , Senator Feinstein's proposed CDPA 2010 is still stuck in the Senate Committee for Energy and Natural Resources, and Congress has plenty of business to consider in a relatively short amount of time, meaning that the bill faces an uphill battle. However, there may be a fleeting window for the Senator's office to establish the two national monuments and host of other off-road recreation and wilderness designations included in CDPA 2010 by including her language in legislation that is more likely to be considered before the full Congress before the end of the year.  It appears that Congress

I'm reading Mitch Tobin's Endangered: Biodiversity on the Brink , and so far I am definitely enjoying the book and learning a lot.  One quote that Tobin uses is attributed to Aldo Leopold, who made a statement that should give us pause in our feverish efforts to change and fragment our final remaining wilderness: "The last word in ignorance is the man who says of an animal or plant: "What good is it?" If the land mechanism as a whole is good, then every part is good, whether we understand it or not.  If the biota, in the course of aeons, has built something we like but do not understand, then who but a fool would discard seemingly useless parts? To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering." This quote reminded me of criticisms by proponents of increased industrialization and urbanization of open spaces in the Mojave Desert, arguing that the desert tortoise, Mohave ground squirrel, or Mojave milkweed do not deserve to be g

In the California Energy Commission's (CEC) first decision among several proposed solar projects under consideration, Beacon Solar was given approval to operate on a portion of former agricultural land near California City, located in the West Mojave Desert.  The Beacon Solar proposal came under scrutiny because it will not use dry-cooling technology, which means it will use 1,400 acre-feet of water per year to cool down the fluid heated by the solar array to produce energy.  That amounts to approximately 456 million gallons of water a year in a State that is historically pushing the limits of its water supply and demand curve, and its not clear that recycled water is a condition of Beacon Solar's certification. One of the conditions of certification upheld in the presiding member's proposed decision (subject to a 30-day comment period now) includes a number of rules governing Beacon Solar's use of water, to include mandating netting over its evaporation ponds (which

The Kelso Depot in the Mojave National Preserve is hosting a photo exhibit featuring pictures taken by high school students of desert tortoises in the Mojave.  The exhibit runs from early May until 7 August, so you still have a couple of weeks left to check it out. Info: Tortoises Through the Lens:  A Conservation Exhibition by Mojave Desert Students May 2 - August 7, 2010 Kelso Depot Visitor Center, Mojave National Preserve

According to the minutes from the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisor's meeting from 13 July, the County approved a position requesting that Federal Agencies avoid purchasing private land for conservation purposes, and also requested that additional land be set aside for Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) use.  At the end of the day, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors showed just how short-sighted their policy decisions are, and supported a subsidy for corporations that are swallowing up open space and desert wilderness for their own profit. Summary:  We (the County Supervisors) support industrial scale development of pristine, public desert wilderness, but we do not want you to conserve additional land in order to off-set the damage.  We should, however, allow more OHV use, which is well known to destroy wilderness.  Net effect: Less wilderness, less wildlife, less camping, less hiking, less photography,  less beautiful vistas, less nature, less open space, less natura

According to a letter submitted by Solar Millennium, the company has asked the California Energy Commission (CEC) to temporarily suspend the application review of its proposed Ridgecrest Solar Power project.  As noted previously on this blog , the Ridgecrest Solar power project could fragment critical Mohave Ground Squirrel habitat and harm a healthy desert tortoise population.   Solar Millennium intends to use the suspension period to conduct an intensive study of the Mohave Ground Squirrel--aided by a known expert on the species--to shed light on the population and behavior in the vicinity of Ridgecrest beginning in Spring 2011 and run for two years.  In its letter, Solar Millennium stated its plans to restart the application for the Ridgecrest site if the study finds that construction will not significantly impact the Mohave Ground Squirrel.    The company could use the study to find a configuration for the site (or perhaps an alternative location) that would be less likely to d

A proposal to construct a 3 Mega-Watt solar power station in Newberry Springs--which was conditionally approved by the San Bernardino County Planning Commission earlier this year--is drawing opposition from neighbors who contend that the Rural Living zoning of the area should preclude industrial scale solar projects.  The site, which would encompass 80 acres and would be built by Solutions for Utilities, is located among disturbed and fallow agricultural land west of the proposed Calico Solar Power project site.  The opposition to the Solutions for Utilities project brings attention to a developing angle in the "solar rush" taking place in the Mojave--pressure placed on rural communities to accept the industrial scale development that should not occur in pristine wilderness, but that would disrupt quality of life in more populated areas. The appeal by the opponents of the site will be heard by the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors at tonight's (13 July) meeting.  The