NIMBYism Puts The Kibosh On America’s Largest Solar Power Plant
In many parts of the American southwest, a mesa is a flat topped geological formation known as a tableland. One of them is the Morman Mesa, a 149,000 acre tableland located above the confluence of the Muddy and Virgin Rivers, north of Las Vegas, Nevada.
The area is under the control of the federal Bureau of Land Management and is a protected area for the desert tortoise. It is also the home of Double Negative, an artistic rendering by artist Micheal Heizer. It consists of two trenches 30 feet wide, 50 feet deep, and 1500 feet long dug into the Earth. It is significant that the 244,000 tons of rocks excavated to create the “sculpture” were unceremoniously dumped into the valley below during its construction. More about that later.
Several years ago, a plan spearheaded by then Senator Harry Reid was put forward to build Battle Born Solar Project, the largest solar power plant in the United States, on Mormon Mesa. The project would cover 14 square miles — about 9000 acres, or less than 7% of the mesa’s total area. Over time, the project developer became Solar Partner VII, a subsidiary of California based Arevia.
Even though the project would be sited out of sight of nearby towns, it provoked a fierce backlash from the local community, a backlash that coalesced into something called Save Our Mesa. At the end of July, Arevia notified BLM it was abandoning the project. The Save Our Mesa folks were ecstatic.
The group argued such a large installation would be an eyesore and curtail the area’s popular recreational activities such as riding dirt bikes and ATVs and skydiving. It also said it would discourage tourists from visiting Heizer’s Double Negative sculpture. But the heart of the protest was “not in my backyard” self-interest. Let’s take a look at the overheated language presented on the group’s website.
I first want to make it clear that we are just a group of residents that saw a possible tragedy for our community and our way of life. We are NOT against renewable energy, we are against irresponsible decisions that are being made without sufficient studies as to what the impacts are.
The majority of our community’s revenue comes from tourism. We lost a lot of tourism and businesses when the shrinking lake levels of Lake Mead occurred closing a nearby beach. We have struggled but built back our economy through tourism. When people come and camp/hotel for a week, they buy our gas, our groceries, eat in our restaurants, use our mechanics and parts stores. This allows these businesses to thrive thus keeping us self sufficient. Feedback from many of our Snowbirds was that they would look for new places to go ‘[if the solar power plant was built]. That’s lost revenue.
We were simply trying to save our community and our way of life. We are not expendable for the “greater good” as I was told we should be! Moapa Valley would NOT gain anything from this project. In fact the power was slated for California. So why should we sacrifice OUR lives? The solar farm that was being proposed was going to be the largest in the nation. 14 sq miles, equivalent to 2/3 the size of Manhattan. Our homes are less than 8000’ from it.
There aren’t enough studies to show what this size of a project would do to us. Will our temps be too hot to live here, would the dust choke us or make us sick, would we ever get rainfall? Would our rivers, that run down both sides of the Mesa into Lake Mead, get contaminated? The list goes on. These were SERIOUS concerns! Simply “saying” that won’t happen, was not good enough, we were essentially going to be lab rats. Our goal all along was to get them to move this project to a more appropriate location, in which they have stated is one of their reasons for withdrawal.
Why are we not pushing for rooftop solar as much as we are pushing to destroy the desert southwests public lands? Look at the rooftops available in major metropolitan areas alone!! Las Vegas has thousands of acres of rooftop with the casinos alone!
We need to slow this rush to solar farms in the desert until studies are done. What will it look like in 10, 20, or 30 years down the road when all these solar farms age out. Are we creating a bigger problem for our future generations when there is millions of tons of non-recyclable waste? The deserts would never recover. Once it’s done, it can’t be undone.
Dissecting The Opposition
OK. That’s quite a long list of complaints Save Our Mesa has got there. And some of them are valid. If the Battle Born Solar Project did actually have a negative impact on the local economy [the developers says it would create over 2,000 new jobs], that would be a valid reason to oppose it. But many of the group’s complaints are 100% pure horse puckey.
A solar power plant will create dust that will roll down and pollute the local lakes and rivers, but thousands of people tearing up the landscape on dirt bikes, off-road vehicles, and jeeps won’t? That strains credulity. Millions of tons of non-recyclable waste? Where did they hear that, Tucker Carlson? And what about the 244,000 tons of debris from the Double Negative project that got dumped into the valley below. Was that used to mulch the petunias in local flower beds?
That seems like the comment left recently on a story I did about Toyota and its anti-EV policies. “Super smart move, let’s all replace CO2 emissions with toxic batteries that end up in rivers and lakes.” Yup, there’s some certified Artificial Stupidity right there.
Selfishness And Self-Interest
NIMBYism is strong in some of the group’s complaints. Why should they provide electricity to those pinheads in San Francisco and LA? The connection between an overheating planet and a lack of water to fill Lake Mead apparently is too remote for them to comprehend. But people are funny. Folks in Wyoming wonder the same thing about wind farms that supply power to West Coast nerds. Those who live in western New York are none too keen about giving up their farmland to keep the lights on in New York City.
Can you suggest a strategy that might help get people onboard with renewable energy? How about cutting them in on the deal by sharing some of that clean energy with the local community? That’s such a no brainer that it’s hard to believe every renewable energy developer doesn’t make it part of their toolkit every time a project is proposed.
Would the attitudes of local residents change if they could have access to clean energy at an attractive price? How about helping them get residential storage batteries that would keep their lights on if there is a power outage?
The Takeaway
A lot of the complaints about the Battle Born Solar Project are overblown, but there is a kernel of reality to them. People who are worried about their personal finances are inclined to be a little bit skittish about slick-talking outsiders riding into town with a trunk load of fancy promises. I’m nobody from nowhere, but I know a developer has to offer the locals something to get them to buy in to all those pie-in-the-sky plans.
You wouldn’t expect a new car customer to buy an EV just because it’s good for the planet, would you? Why should renewable energy be any different? These developers don’t seem to have a very good understanding of human behavior. Yes, the locals doth protest too much, but the developer deserves some blame for handling the public relations aspect of its project so poorly.
Why spend all that time and money on plans and permits but none on some good old-fashioned salesmanship? The US and the world are the big losers in this deal.
[Editor’s note: Some research in Denmark several years ago found that a critical solution to avoid NIMBYism blocking large wind power projects was to bring the financial benefits to locals to some degree — give them a cut of the profits. I’m not sure how much that insight is used by large renewable energy project developers, but as Steve says, at this stage, “it’s hard to believe every renewable energy developer doesn’t make it part of their toolkit every time a project is proposed.” My impression, though, is that not much is offered to local communities in almost all cases. Promises of jobs and an economic boost, of course, but not clear direct benefits to nearby residents. —Zach]
In a landmark shift for the U.S. housing finance system, the Federal Housing Finance Agency has issued a directive ordering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to formally consider cryptocurrency as an asset in single-family mortgage loan risk assessments.
The move, signed by FHFA Director William J. Pulte on Wednesday, signals a new era of crypto integration into traditional financial infrastructure — this time within the core of American home lending.
The order directs both housing finance giants to develop proposals that include digital assets — without requiring borrowers to liquidate them into U.S. dollars prior to a loan closing.
Pulte said in a post on X that the move aligns with President Donald Trump‘s vision “to make the United States the crypto capital of the world.”
Historically, cryptocurrency has been excluded from underwriting frameworks due to volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and the inability to easily verify reserves. This directive changes that.
The decision comes at a time of increasing institutional embrace of crypto across banking, payments, and federal policy.
“Cryptocurrency is an emerging asset class that may offer an opportunity to build wealth outside of the stock and bond markets,” the order states, acknowledging crypto’s growing role in household financial portfolios.
The directive restricts consideration to digital assets that are stored on U.S.-regulated, centralized exchanges and can be clearly evidenced. It also requires Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to develop internal adjustments to account for crypto’s market volatility and ensure that any risk-weighted reserves comprised of crypto do not compromise underwriting standards.
Under the directive, both enterprises must submit their assessment proposals to the boards of directors for approval and then to the FHFA for final review.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were put under government control in September 2008 as entities that are known as government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs.
Arevon Energy just brought a massive new battery storage project online in San Diego’s Barrio Logan neighborhood, and it’s built to keep the lights on when the grid gets stressed.
The new Peregrine Energy Storage Project clocks in at 200 megawatts (MW)/400 megawatt-hours (MWh), making it one of the biggest battery storage facilities in the San Diego region. That’s enough stored energy to power around 200,000 homes for two hours during peak demand.
Built for $300 million, Peregrine is the fifth utility-scale energy storage project Arevon has launched in California. It uses lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which are known for their safety and thermal stability. LFP batteries use iron, phosphate, and lithium to create a strong chemical bond that resists overheating, making them safer than other lithium-ion chemistries. They also have a longer lifespan and are less prone to degradation over time.
The facility created more than 90 construction jobs and is expected to generate over $28 million in property tax revenue over its lifetime.
Energy storage projects like this are key to making California’s grid more stable and reliable. By soaking up clean energy when demand is low and discharging it when the grid is under strain, Peregrine helps reduce blackouts and avoid spikes in electricity prices.
“The successful completion of Peregrine Energy Storage is a result of the collaborative efforts of the project’s stakeholders and the local community who collectively support California’s renewable energy goals,” said Kevin Smith, CEO of Arevon.
Arevon already operates more than 3.2 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy projects in California, with another 800 MW under construction. Nationwide, it owns and operates 4.7 GW of solar and storage projects across 17 states.
Read more: SpaceX alums just supercharged EV charging at Costco
To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and you share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The time is finally here: there are actual driverless Tesla Robotaxis on the road, at least in a portion of Austin, Texas, as of this weekend. And thanks to their ridership of exclusively Tesla influencers, almost all of the miles they’ve put under their belt has been filmed or livestreamed, which gives us plenty of footage to discover what’s gone right and what’s gone wrong.
Tesla’s Robotaxi service went live on Sunday around noon, at least for the relatively small number of Tesla influencers who were invited to ride.
It’s a limited launch in several other ways, too – it’s geofenced to somewhere around 30 square miles in South Austin which Tesla spent additional time mapping and testing in, it’s supported by backup teleoperation, it doesn’t operate from 12am-6am or in bad weather, and every car has a “safety monitor” in the passenger seat with access to controls to stop the vehicle.
Nevertheless, there are Teslas without someone in the driver’s seat, and that’s still a step forward, and partial delivery of a promise that Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been making for about a decade now (though there are still other unfulfillied promises on the table).
Because of that decade of promises, a lot of eyes have been on this launch – and also because of the fact that every invited rider is chasing views on social media, so we have a lot of footage just a few days in.
To be clear, this is not the first driverless taxi on the road. GM used to operate robotaxis through subsidiary Cruise (more on that in the Take), and Google has its Waymo robotaxis in multiple US cities (it just expanded its service area last week) and is even testing overseas.
So there’s already plenty of text and video out there talking about the experience of riding in non-Tesla self-driving taxis (like my long writeup and video of my rides in Waymo’s driverless taxi during a chaotic Venice Beach weekend).
But, Tesla is Tesla, and there’s always more attention on what Tesla does. So lets put a little more attention on the various errors that we’ve seen from Robotaxis in the 3 days since launch.
We did link to several of these videos, and others, in a post the day of the launch, when vibes were quite positive from the Tesla fans who were invited to ride. In the first few hours, there were few issues.
But, soon, errors started creeping in. We added some as updates to that article as they came in, but we thought this article would be better to compile them all (and thanks to r/SelfDrivingCars which compiled several others)
Indecision leads to driving into an oncoming lane
In Tesla Daily’s first Robotaxi ride, the Tesla tries to attempt a left turn one intersection early, gets indecisive, then continues on, driving through an oncoming lane for a time before re-entering a left turn lane ahead. See the whole exchange starting at around 7:08 in this video:
Robotaxi stops in middle of street for about a minute
Dirty Tesla pressed the “pull over” button to get dropped off early, and the car got confused and tried to let him out in the middle of a left turn lane. Support ended up “resuming the ride” and the Robotaxi found a nearby gas station to drop him off at. The whole interaction took about a minute, starting at ~8:58 in the video:
Robotaxi drops rider off in an intersection, stays there for ~55 seconds
Farzad also asked for a slightly early dropoff, and the car stopped quite early… as in, gridlocked in an intersection and leaking out into one lane of traffic. Thanks to wide Texas streets for letting others by, I guess. 38:04 in the video:
Tesla phantom brakes when caught by sun glare
Kim Java had a hard “phantom braking” moment, where the vehicle hits the brakes for no particular reason, while driving into the setting sun. 10:13 in the video:
Safety monitor intervenes, presses “stop in lane” to avoid UPS truck
In what seems to be the first true intervention caught on video, Dave Lee was approaching a parking spot when a UPS truck stopped in the lane and started backing up. The Tesla “safety monitor” in the front seat wisely anticipated the situation and was hovering the “stop in lane” button, then pressed it when it seemed like the car wouldn’t stop on its own. The car then remained in position while the UPS truck backed up, giving it just enough room, but it probably would have been nicer if it backed up a little more. Excellent job by the safety monitor here, really. 28:53 in the video:
The previous day, Dave Lee was getting picked up by a Robotaxi in a parking lot and it hit a curb in the parking lot right at the start of the drive (at 0:39 in the video).
Robotaxi hits a bump too fast, then goes 27 in a 15mph zone
Farzad was heading to a disc golf course on a low-speed street. The Robotaxi handled one speed bump well, but then took another one too fast. It then drove past a 15mph speed limit sign, slowed down for a deer, and then picked speed back up to 27mph. The whole exchange starts around 14:27:
In the same video, starting at 4:56, the car seems not to know what to do about a shopping bag in the road – it brakes, then considers going around it, then just runs it over.
Tesla brakes for nearby police, exterior view
Edward Niedermeyer, a longtime Tesla hater, posted a video from an exterior angle of a Robotaxi behaving strangely nearby police vehicles. The Robotaxi passes by one police vehicle with lights on in a parking lot, then brakes rather hard when it passes by another police car blocking a side intersection, then passes by another at normal speed, then brakes hard for a fourth despite it being in a parking lot behind a curb. Slowing down would be appropriate behavior in this instance, but the braking events seem more sudden than necessary, and inconsistent given the position of the police vehicles involved.
Safety monitor intervenes, hops in drivers seat in parking lot
In what seems to be the second intervention, Dirty Tesla had just gotten out of the taxi and while it was trying to leave the parking lot, it nearly ran into a parked car. The Safety monitor intervened to stop the car, then apparently got out and drove the car away manually (not captured in video).
Electrek’s Take
Yes, the title is lighthearted. I was going for irony.
The fact is that there are issues with Tesla’s approach to self-driving, and these various videos show them.
Tesla drivers are well acquainted with the current limitations and quirks of FSD as well, many of which were shown off in the clips above. It doesn’t do well with sun glare (neither do you, but you can wear sunglasses and/or flip down the visor for a little help), it sometimes misses speed bumps, it phantom brakes, and it has weird moments of indecision sometimes. C’mon, we’ve all seen it, let’s be honest with ourselves here.
As best I can tell from hundreds of miles away, these vehicles exhibit pretty similar behavior to the FSD in the vehicles I’ve driven. It works pretty well a lot of the time, but most of the time I’m also glad I’m there in the driver’s seat so I can tell it to STOP CHANGING LANES FOR THE 5TH TIME THIS MINUTE FOR PETE’S SAKE.
Tesla’s system also uses only cameras, not LiDAR, and most experts (including Tesla engineers) agree that incorporating multiple sensing modes is the correct path to take (here’s more on that). Tesla is using only cameras because it’s cheaper, and thus more scalable (though LiDAR prices have dropped rapidly).
In particular, LiDAR does better in poor weather than cameras do. We haven’t seen particularly bad weather yet for Robotaxi (there was rain in Austin on the morning of the Robotaxi’s launch – and the launch coincidentally did not happen until afternoon), and Tesla’s FSD system does work in the rain.
But even I, in famously sunny Southern California, have encountered a rainstorm severe enough for FSD to suddenly shut off and tell me to take over. So, in the very conditions that you’d definitely want an enclosed space to keep you safe from the weather, Robotaxi might not work.
So far, the errors we’ve seen above have not caused any sort of damage, either to Tesla occupants or the general public (except for some curb rash, perhaps), but as miles get put on the system, it is inevitable that something will happen.
When something does happen, the public will not respond kindly to it. Recall when GM’s Cruise robotaxi got into an accident in San Francisco – which was actually entirely the fault of a human driver. A human driver struck a pedestrian, who was then pushed into the path of a Cruise vehicle which didn’t have time to stop, and hit the pedestrian as well.
This was largely reported as a self-driving car crash, even though Cruise didn’t cause the accident in the first place. Cruise was, however, responsible for having poor after-crash behavior, as the car didn’t realize the pedestrian was stuck under the vehicle and dragged her on the road for several feet, and then hid this fact from investigators. As a result, its license was pulled in California and it soon shut down elsewhere as well.
We are all aware of how many unpredictable things happen on the road every day, and how many problems are caused by human drivers. Autonomous technology does promise solutions to that, particularly in its theoretical ability to make decisions quickly. But autonomous technology has heretofore not been great at understanding what to do in unexpected situations, like the Cruise issue above.
Waymo has had issues as well, one of which you can see in my own experience with the system, where the car I was in got stuck for several minutes trying and failing to make a left turn into a crowded street. Or this clip where it gets stuck in a parking lot and needs a manual driver.
One pattern I do notice is that a lot of Tesla’s errors seem to happen when the car is dropping off or picking up riders. This could be because parking lots are more complex spaces than roads, or simply because the ability to park is a newer feature for FSD. In my time in Waymos, it also seems the least decisive when trying to find parking or pickup spots.
But the exceptional part about these Tesla issues is that it’s only been three days, and there are reportedly only 10 cars and 20-some riders using the system. Tesla has always said that it could scale its solution to an entire fleet with a single software update, without geofencing, thus turning the entire fleet autonomous overnight.
And Tesla has also always been famous for the “move fast and break things” approach which is so common in Silicon Valley. This is all well and good for tech, but when you’re dealing with thousands of pounds of metal going down the road near pedestrians, things can get serious real quick.
And so, its questionable that Tesla is operating in a regulatory vacuum and doesn’t want the public to see details about its program or FSD safety data. We saw what hiding information from regulators did to Cruise, and it certainly wouldn’t advance Tesla’s progress if the same happened.
Thankfully, Tesla does seem to be taking a more measured approach than we might have expected, given its inclusion of safety monitors who we’ve already seen avoid two accidents in just the first three days of operation. But that’s not scalable, and while Tesla fans have pointed out that Waymo also started with safety monitors, it didn’t charge fees or take public rides during that testing phase, and Tesla is doing both.
It remains to be seen if Tesla’s approach will be scalable faster than Waymo’s (or MOIA’s, or Zoox, or anyone else’s), but given the first few days of limited operation in Austin, the dream of expanding everywhere overnight does seem unlikely.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike