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]
Environment
Fintechs like Block and PayPal are battling like never before to be your all-in-one online bank
Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter Inc., speaks during the Bitcoin 2021 conference in Miami, Florida, U.S., on Friday, June 4, 2021.
Eva Marie Uzcategui | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Jack Dorsey’s Block got started as Square, offering small businesses a simple way to accept payments via smartphone. Affirm began as an online lender, giving consumers more affordable credit options for retail purchases. PayPal upended finance more than 25 years ago by letting businesses accept online payments.
The three fintechs, which were each launched by tech luminaries in different eras of Silicon Valley history, are increasingly converging as they seek to become virtual all-in-one banks. In their latest earnings reports this month, their lofty ambitions became more clear than ever.
Block was the last of the three to report, and the high-level numbers were troubling. Earnings and revenue missed estimates, sending the stock down 18%, its steepest drop in five years. But to hear Dorsey discuss the results, Block is successfully implementing a strategy of offering consumers the ability to pay businesses by smartphone, send money to friends through Cash App, and access credit and debit services while also getting more ways to invest in bitcoin.
“In 2024, we expanded Square from a payments tool into a full commerce platform, enhanced Cash App’s financial services offerings, and restructured our organization,” Dorsey said on Block’s earnings call on Thursday after the bell.
Block and an expanding roster of fintech rivals have all come to see that their moats aren’t strong enough in their core markets to keep the competition away, and that the path to growth is through a diverse set of financial services traditionally offered by banks. They’re playing to an audience of digital-first consumers who either didn’t grow up using a brick-and-mortar bank or realized at an early age that they had no need to ever set foot in a physical branch, or to meet with a loan officer or customer service rep.
“Longer term, we see a significant opportunity to grow actives, particularly among that digital-native audience like Millennial and Gen Z,” Block CFO Amrita Ahuja said on the earnings call.
As part of its expansion, Block has encroached on Affirm’s turf, with an increasing focus on buy now, pay later (BNPL) offerings that it picked up in its $29 billion purchase of Afterpay, which closed in early 2022. Block’s market share in BNPL increased by one point to 19%, while Affirm held its position at 17%, according to a recent report from Mizuho. Both companies are outperforming Klarna in BNPL, the report said.
Block’s BNPL play is now tied into Cash App, with an integration activated this week that gives users another way to make purchases through a single app. With Cash App monthly active users stagnating at 57 million for the last few quarters, the company is focused on engagement rather than rapid user acquisition.
“We think that there is significant opportunity for growth longer term, but there are some deliberate decisions we’ve made as part of our banker-based strategy in the near term” that have kept user numbers from increasing, Ahuja said. “This is a part of our continuous enhancements to drive healthy customer engagement as we bank our base.”
Compared to Block, Wall Street had a very different reaction to Affirm’s earnings earlier this month, pushing the stock up 22% after the company’s results sailed past estimates.
Affirm founder and CEO Max Levchin, who was previously a co-founder of PayPal, built his company with the promise of giving consumers lower-cost and easy-to-tap intstallment loans for purchases like electronics, jewelry and travel.
The BNPL battlefront
In its latest earnings report, Affirm posted a 35% increase in gross merchandise volume to $10.1 billion. Revenue surged 47% to $770 million, while its active consumer base grew 23% to 21 million.
Beyond BNPL, Levchin has pushed Affirm into debit with the Affirm Card, which now has 1.7 million active users, up 136% year-over-year.
“Anything we can do to personalize the experience, to give people a chance to feel like this is the best alternative they have to their debit or their credit card is what we’re busy with,” Levchin said on the earnings call. He said the goal is to get the card to 20 million users, spending on average $7,500 per year.
Affirm is also partnering with FIS to bring its debit card functionality to traditional banks.
Levchin left PayPal in 2002, after the company was acquired by eBay. It was a decade before he’d start working to help popularize the modern day BNPL market.
Now his former employer, which spun back out from eBay in 2015, is in on the BNPL game.
Under the leadership of CEO Alex Chriss, who took over the company in September 2023, PayPal is in the midst of a turnaround that involves working to better monetize products like Braintree and Venmo and joining the world of physical commerce with a debit card inside its mobile app.
Investors responded positively in 2024, pushing the stock up almost 40% after a brutal few years. But the stock dropped 13% after its earnings report, even as profit and revenue were better than expected. PayPal’s total payment volume for the quarter hit $437.8 billion, slightly below projections, while transaction margins rose to 47% from 45.8% — a sign of improving profitability.
One of Chriss’ big pushes is to get more out of Venmo, which has long been a popular way for friends to pay each other but hasn’t been a big hit with businesses. Venmo’s total payment volume in the quarter rose 10% year-over-year, with increased adoption at DoorDash, Starbucks, and Ticketmaster.
PayPal is also promoting Venmo’s debit card and “Pay With Venmo,” which saw 30% and 20% monthly active growth in 2024, respectively. The company is introducing new services to improve merchant retention, including its Fastlane one-click checkout feature, designed to compete with Apple Pay and Shopify’s Shop Pay.
Last year, the company launched PayPal Everywhere, a cashback-driven initiative designed to boost engagement within its mobile app. Chriss said on the earnings call that it’s “driving significant increases in debit card adoption and opening new categories of spend.”
As with virtually all financial services products, the new offerings from Block, Affirm and PayPal are designed to produce growth but not at the expense of profit. Banks operate at low margins, in large part because there’s so much competition for lower-priced loans and better cash-back options. There’s also all the costs associated with underwriting and compliance.
That’s the environment in which fintechs have to operate, though without the costs of running a network of physical branches.
Levchin talks about helping customers spend less, not more. And Block acknowledges the need for hefty investments to reach the company’s desired outcome.
“This is a part of our continuous enhancements to drive healthy customer engagement as we bank our base,” Ahuja said. “We’ve made investments in critical areas like compliance, support and risk. And as we’ve done that, we’ve progressed more of our actives through our identity verification process, which in turn, unlocks greater access to those actives to our full suite of financial tools.”
The Trump administration is shutting down EV chargers at all federal government buildings and is also expected to sell off the General Services Administration‘s (GSA) newly bought EVs.
GSA, which manages all federal government-owned buildings, also operates the federal buildings’ EV chargers. Federally owned EVs and federal employee-owned personal EVs are charged on those 8,000 charging ports.
The Verge reports it’s been told by a source that plans will be officially announced internally next week, and it’s seen an email that GSA has already sent to regional offices about the plans:
“As GSA has worked to align with the current administration, we have received direction that all GSA-owned charging stations are not mission-critical.”
The GSA is working on the timing of canceling current network contracts that keep the EV chargers operational. Once those contracts are canceled, the stations will be taken out of service and “turned off at the breaker,” the email reads. Other chargers will be turned off starting next week.
“Neither Government Owned Vehicles nor Privately Owned Vehicles will be able to charge at these charging stations once they’re out of service.”
Colorado Public Radio first reported yesterday that it had seen the email that was sent to the Denver Federal Center, which has 22 EV charging stations at 11 locations.
The Trump/Elon Musk administration has taken the GSA’s fleet electrification webpage offline entirely. (An archived version is available here.)
The Verge‘s source also said that the GSA will offload the EVs it bought during the Biden administration, although it’s unknown whether they’ll be sold or stored.
Read more: Trump just canceled the federal NEVI EV charger program
If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you 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 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.
Ben Zhou, chief executive officer of ByBit, during the Token2049 conference in Singapore, on Thursday, Sept. 14, 2023.
Joseph Nair | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Bybit, a major cryptocurrency exchange, has been hacked to the tune of $1.5 billion in digital assets, in what’s estimated to be the largest crypto heist in history.
The attack compromised Bybit’s cold wallet, an offline storage system designed for security. The stolen funds, primarily in ether, were quickly transferred across multiple wallets and liquidated through various platforms.
“Please rest assured that all other cold wallets are secure,” Ben Zhou, CEO of Bybit, posted on X. “All withdrawals are NORMAL.”
Blockchain analysis firms, including Elliptic and Arkham Intelligence, traced the stolen crypto as it was moved to various accounts and swiftly offloaded. The hack far surpasses previous thefts in the sector, according to Elliptic. That includes the $611 million stolen from Poly Network in 2021 and the $570 million drained from Binance in 2022.
Analysts at Elliptic later linked the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group, a state-sponsored hacking collective notorious for siphoning billions of dollars from the cryptocurrency industry. The group is known for exploiting security vulnerabilities to finance North Korea’s regime, often using sophisticated laundering methods to obscure the flow of funds.
“We’ve labelled the thief’s addresses in our software, to help to prevent these funds from being cashed-out through any other exchanges,” said Tom Robinson, chief scientist at Elliptic, in an email.
The breach immediately triggered a rush of withdrawals from Bybit as users feared potential insolvency. Zhou said outflows had stabilized. To reassure customers, he announced that Bybit had secured a bridge loan from undisclosed partners to cover any unrecoverable losses and maintain operations.
The Lazarus Group’s history of targeting crypto platforms dates back to 2017, when the group infiltrated four South Korean exchanges and stole $200 million worth of bitcoin. As law enforcement agencies and crypto tracking firms work to trace the stolen assets, industry experts warn that large-scale thefts remain a fundamental risk.
“The more difficult we make it to benefit from crimes such as this, the less frequently they will take place,” Elliptic’s Robinson wrote in a post.
WATCH: Crypto stocks plunge
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 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
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway