4 ms·

Are these lands pre-cleared for building, no additional environmental review? Can they also pre-clear transmission corridors to connect these solar panels to th

Are these lands pre-cleared for building, no additional environmental review? Can they also pre-clear transmission corridors to connect these solar panels to the grid, no additional environmental review and a promise to exercise imminent domain?

beaeglebeached 3y ago
I wonder if they could put some energy dense industry out there so they don't have to transmit it.
- trhway 3y ago
  Bitcoin or training&inference farms, so you’d need only an internet fiber (or even just wireless/satellite) connection.
- bobthepanda 3y ago
  You would need transport infrastructure for the goods then. How many places have transport with no power infrastructure? Roads are also generally worse for the environment than transmission lines.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Load centers aren't too far, and transmission is reasonably close. You can build transmission in parallel to generation facilities, versus serial order of operations. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=27152 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=27152 https://atlas.eia.gov/apps/all-energy-infrastructure-and-resources/explore https://atlas.eia.gov/apps/all-energy-infrastructure-and-res... https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/fedmaps::u-s-electric-power-transmission-lines/explore?location=36.718299%2C-113.340816%2C7.00 https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/fedmaps::u-s-electric-power-...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
floatrock 3y ago
from the article: > The updated roadmap... focuses on lands within 10 miles of existing or planned transmission lines and moves away from lands with sensitive resources.
- megaman821 3y ago
  That is nice, but we all know that does nothing to stop a decade or more of lawsuits. The Government could preempt all those lawsuits now by pre-clearing the areas so they can start building as soon as possible.
  - barney54 3y ago
    Congress could preempt those laws, but the administration itself cannot. They can expedite permitting, but there will still be lawsuits.
  - AlotOfReading 3y ago
    They probably couldn't feasibly pre-clear this amount of land even if they wanted to. There are almost certainly resources (e.g. human remains and cultural sites) somewhere in that area that not only does the BLM not have authority over, but for which the existing legislation is basically Congress saying "Not within in our authority".
    - serial_dev 3y ago
      I was very confused about Black Lives Matter's role here... BLM in this context refers to bBureau of Land Management.
  - glenstein 3y ago
    Being able to challenge the construction of transmission lines is a good thing, not a bad thing. The largest unfragmented forest east of the Mississippi was just carved in half by a new transmission line in Maine, when there were alternative options that would not have done so. It just so happened that the most environmentally harmful option was nevertheless the most profitable, so they rammed it through. And while I don't like the outcome, I like that we had the ability to challenge it. An under-appreciated aspect of corridor construction has been utilities being able to use state level regulatory capture to ram through projects that contribute to forest fragmentation. Being able to challenge these for legitimate purposes has to be balanced against the equally legitimate problem of NIMBY obstructionism of corridor construction. But my feeling is that utilities aren't interested in a balance, they are interested pushing the NIMBY narrative to achieve a complete blank checks to circumvent environmental reviews altogether.

beaeglebeached 3y ago

I wonder if they could put some energy dense industry out there so they don't have to transmit it.

trhway 3y ago
Bitcoin or training&inference farms, so you’d need only an internet fiber (or even just wireless/satellite) connection.
bobthepanda 3y ago
You would need transport infrastructure for the goods then. How many places have transport with no power infrastructure? Roads are also generally worse for the environment than transmission lines.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
Load centers aren't too far, and transmission is reasonably close. You can build transmission in parallel to generation facilities, versus serial order of operations. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=27152 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=27152 https://atlas.eia.gov/apps/all-energy-infrastructure-and-resources/explore https://atlas.eia.gov/apps/all-energy-infrastructure-and-res... https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/fedmaps::u-s-electric-power-transmission-lines/explore?location=36.718299%2C-113.340816%2C7.00 https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/fedmaps::u-s-electric-power-...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

floatrock 3y ago

from the article: > The updated roadmap... focuses on lands within 10 miles of existing or planned transmission lines and moves away from lands with sensitive resources.

megaman821 3y ago
That is nice, but we all know that does nothing to stop a decade or more of lawsuits. The Government could preempt all those lawsuits now by pre-clearing the areas so they can start building as soon as possible.
- barney54 3y ago
  Congress could preempt those laws, but the administration itself cannot. They can expedite permitting, but there will still be lawsuits.
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  They probably couldn't feasibly pre-clear this amount of land even if they wanted to. There are almost certainly resources (e.g. human remains and cultural sites) somewhere in that area that not only does the BLM not have authority over, but for which the existing legislation is basically Congress saying "Not within in our authority".
  - serial_dev 3y ago
    I was very confused about Black Lives Matter's role here... BLM in this context refers to bBureau of Land Management.
- glenstein 3y ago
  Being able to challenge the construction of transmission lines is a good thing, not a bad thing. The largest unfragmented forest east of the Mississippi was just carved in half by a new transmission line in Maine, when there were alternative options that would not have done so. It just so happened that the most environmentally harmful option was nevertheless the most profitable, so they rammed it through. And while I don't like the outcome, I like that we had the ability to challenge it. An under-appreciated aspect of corridor construction has been utilities being able to use state level regulatory capture to ram through projects that contribute to forest fragmentation. Being able to challenge these for legitimate purposes has to be balanced against the equally legitimate problem of NIMBY obstructionism of corridor construction. But my feeling is that utilities aren't interested in a balance, they are interested pushing the NIMBY narrative to achieve a complete blank checks to circumvent environmental reviews altogether.