solar pv - environmental due diligence
DESCRIPTION
Environmental Due Diligence for siting and permitting solar PV facilities at the utility scaleTRANSCRIPT
EUCIDue Diligence forSolar PV Projects
Daniel Belin, AICP
ecology and environment, Inc.www.ene.com
Enhancing Due Diligenceand Streamlining Permitting
June 14-15, 2011
Daniel Belin, AICP
ecology and environment, Inc.www.ene.com
Project Development Overview
Due Diligence – Real Estate vs. Environmental
GIS Demo
The Permitting Process
Streamlining Tips
Phase I & II ESA
Legal standard - ASTM Real Estate document Contamination liabilities CERCLA Benefits – addresses legal liability for
contamination Limitation – does not address other
regulatory liability
Phase I & II ESA
Not a green lightto start design
Don’t rush intodevelopment
Did notinvest inearly issueidentification
Adjustinglayout afterdesign
Wastes timeand money
Database searches
GIS investigation
Site reconnaissance
Agency consultation
Permitting matrix
Critical Issues Analysis
Natural Environment Wildlife and Habitat
Special Status and State-Listed species
Habitat fragmentation orremoval
Microclimate/habitatchanges
Water availability
Cultural resources
Built Environment Land use
Flat-panel PV -- 2.5~12.5acre/MW
Solar-thermal -- 5.0~12.5acre/MW
Aesthetics/Visual Resources,glare
Recreation
Public involvement
Must be compatible withother uses, immediateand adjacent Mining and Agriculture often
compatible
Recreation/Tourism requiresconsideration
Federal land: recreation use classesmay preclude large-scale solardevelopments: Off-Highway Vehicles (OHV)
Near Designated Wilderness Areasand Wilderness Study Areas
Wild and Scenic Rivers
National Trails
Scenic Byways
National, state, and local parks
Cumulative impacts
Disruption of wildlifemovement corridors
Direct loss of orchange in nativespecies habitat
Shading from solararrays can create amicroclimate
Disturbance due tohuman activity,roads, fences, andlight
Includes archaeology,paleontology, and historicstructures
Consultation with StateHistoric Preservation Office
Tribal and federal agencyconsultation
Varying levels of assessment Phase I survey where resources
possible
Phase II survey whereresources known
Monitoring during construction
Historic buildings 50+ yearsold. Can include structures(cemeteries, bridges, dams)
Often the most significant publicconcern
Landscapes differ in their abilityto accommodate change
Technical approaches can quantifyimpacts. BLM and USFS havestandard protocols.
Strategies to minimize impactsand ease public controversy
Determine visual sensitivity level
Reduce impacts with careful arrayand road placement, vegetationscreens
Water for thermal-solarproject cooling andmirror washingrequirements canbe significant
Impacts to wetlandsand streams (arroyos)must be avoided ormitigated
Runoff / erosion fromimpervious surface
1 Data calculated from U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Demands on Water Resources: Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water (Dec. 2006), available athttp://www.sandia.gov/energy-water/docs/121-RptToCongress-EWwEIAcomments-FINAL.pdf. Carter provided notes. See Carter & Campbell, supra note 8, at 8.a. Data is for cooling tower technology.b. Includes water consumed in producing or enhancing the fuel source and in generation; excluding cooling water consumption.c. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Fuel from the Sky: Solar Power’s Potential for Western Energy Supply, NREL/SR-550-32160 (July 2002), at 99.d. CRS provided note.e. Cooling ponds which are commonly used at nuclear facilities consume roughly 720 gal/MWh.f. IGCC is Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle.22 The biomass referenced in Table 2 does not include woody biomass.
Water Use by Fuel Source and Generation Technology1
Generation Technology
Wet CoolingWaterConsumtion(gal/MWh)a
Other WaterConsumptionb
(gal/MWh)GenerationTechnology
Wet CoolingWaterConsumtion(gal/MWh)a
Other WaterConsumptionb
(gal/MWh)
Solar Trough 760-920 8 Biomass2 300-480irrigationdependentd
Solar Tower 750 8
Natural GasCombinedCycle 180 18-21
Photovoltaic Solar 0 5c Coal (IGCC)f 200 140
Wind 0 0 Hydroelectricavg. 4,500(evap)
Fossil 300-480 35-104 Nuclear 400-720e 75-180
» Case Study – Silver State SolarPredicted Water Consumption 400 MW PV
Ivanpah Valley, NV
600 Acre-Feet-Annually (AFA) / 4 years(construction)
21 AFA (operations)
Average industrial development inregion – 4,717 AFA
Acres Zoning1:
Conservation
Areas (b)
2: T & E Species(c)
3: Open Space/Parks (d)
4: VisualResources
(e)
5/6:Hist./Cult.(miles) (f)
7: Floodplain/Drainage (g)
8:Wetlands
(h)
9: Waterways(i)
10: PrimeAg. Land (j)
14: Easements,ROWs, Legal Issues
15: OtherEncumbrances,
17: Other SignificantResources and
Notes:
160 AG-40 No.
Swainson'shawk 0.8 milesaway
Delta button-celery 1.5 milesand
giant gartersnake approx 3miles
No
8.15 milesfrom
designatedscenic route
7.79 milesfrom
HistoricHouse
Yes. Floodplainborders northern
part of property andstream through
property/Moderately well
drained
No
Stream/Rivercrosses the
property;canal/ditch alongnorthern border
PrimeFarmland
Site is located in anEnterprise ZoneSite has an AgriculturalPreserve R-69-C1designation
40.09 AG-40 Yes.
California tigersalamander
NorthernHardpan VernalPool
vernal pool fairyshrimp
valley elderberrylonghorn beetle
westernspadefoot are
< 5 miles from thesite but not on site
No
1.42milesfrom
designatedscenic route
9.15 milesfrom
HistoricFarm
No/Moderately welldrained
FreshwaterEmergent
Wetland oneasternpropertyborder.
Stream/Riverborders
northwest corner
Grazingland
Site is located in anEnterprise ZoneSite has an AgriculturalPreserve R-69-C1designation
106.62 AG-40 No
Swainson's hawk0.29 miles from thesite, burrowing owl0.6 miles from the
site
Park 2.3 milesfrom the site
22.96 fromthe
intersectionof HWY580/5.
4.89 milesfrom
HistoricHouse
Yes. Floodplaincovers southern
end ofproperty/somewhat
poorly drained
No
OneStream/Rivercrosses the
property, onestream/riverborders the
south end of thesite
Easternportion is
primefarmland
Site is located in anEnterprise ZoneSite has an AgriculturalPreserve R-80-8
43.31 AG-40 No
Swainson's hawk0.8 miles
Burrowing owl 2.6miles. Californiatiger salamander
within 5 miles.
Park 1.7milesfrom the site
23.24 milesfrom the
intersectionof HWY580/5.
4.22 milesfrom
HistoricHouse
No/Somewhatpoorly drained
NoNo streams or
rivers
Farmlandof
StatewideImportanc
e
Site is located in anEnterprise ZoneNo AgriculturalPreserve designation
GIS Online Siting Tool
1. Define regulatory process and involved agencies
2. Conduct initial surveys and studies to identifypotential environmental impacts and requiredpermits
3. Hold agency consultations
4. Complete detailed environmental surveys
5. Develop permit applications
6. Agency review
7. Public hearings
8. Final permits issued
Bureau of LandManagementROW Applicationand Plan ofDevelopment
NationalEnvironmentalPolicy Act
State SitingCommittee
Conditional UsePermit Applications(County level)
Pre- application meeting
Submit preliminary application
County scheduled public hearing with P&ZBoard and BOCC
Submit final 1041 application
30 day publicnotice andcomment
period
30 day publicnotice andcomment
period
Total:
3-4 Months
Joint public hearing with Planning andZoning Board and BOCC
P&Z Board hold meeting on same day andissue recommendations to BOCC
BOCC MeetingFinal Approval issued within 7 days
0-2 Months
6-9 Months
3 Months
0-2 Months
1 Month
Total:
18 Months
Preliminary Discussions
Pre- Application Period
Application Submittal Period
Hearing and Service of Decision
Appeal Window
Application
Notice of Intent Published
Public Scoping
Draft EIS
Comment Period / Agency Review
Final EIS
Comment Period / Agency Review
Record of Decision (ROD)
Appeal Period
30 days
45 days
6-9 months
45 days
6-9 months
45 days
Total:
18-24 months
What takes so long? Seasonal field studies
NEPA/State equivalentapplicability
Permit linkages andAgency communication
Agency expertise andworkload
Statutory review times
Quality andcompleteness ofapplications
Agency and communityrelationships
“By putting these renewable energyprojects on a fast track, we are managingour public lands not just for conventionalenergy development but also forenvironmentally responsible renewableenergy production that will power our cleanenergy future.”
Secretary of Interior, Ken SalazarNovember 5, 2009
NEPA Fast Tracked Projects 2 Solar PV projects
Silver State – 400 MW PV
Start to Finish – 14 months
Agency schedule pre-set
RECO office
Statutory review times
Strong management on all sides
Project completely vetted
before initiating NEPA
Transmission lines in Ivanpah Valley
Desert tortoise Streamlining processIdentification of key issues fortimely resolution - 9 monthsbefore filing the application
Shaved 6 months byestablishing pre-filing process
Issues raised during pre-filing:
Quantitative cumulative impactsapproach for desert tortoise
New alternatives
Dry lakes recreation
Visual resources
Mojave National Preserve
Get your team talking details for a completeProject Description
Dual state and federal lead agencies
Cover needs for both agencies at once
Added complexity can mean delays
Plan ahead even more with two leadagencies
Frequent Data Gaps in Project Descriptions
Complete land use tables
GIS Data for access roads, tower locations
Helicopter use plans
Noxious weed plan
Construction schedule – realistic?
Work force requirements for O&M
Decommissioning
All project components covered?
Construction equipment used – air emissions
Expect asophisticated public
Document alloutreach efforts
Identify key publicissues for yourproject
Explain alternativesdevelopmentprocess
Take publicrecommendationsfor alternativesseriously
Track all alternatives screened
Address system alternatives(PV vs. CSP)
Develop an adequate range ofalternatives: BLM to require 3 to 4alternatives for renewable projects
Agencies expect public engagement todevelop alternatives for contentiousprojects
No longerbusiness as usual
The bar has beenraised
Early agencyattention equalsfeedback for yourdevelopingproject and mostlikely a quickerdecision process