Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon

sponsored by
Business


Solar plant site ban lifted

Agency will take bids to put projects on public lands

Two days after Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., promised the government would end its moratorium on applications for solar power sites, the Bureau of Land Management did just that.

The decision also followed a June 25 letter from Gov. Jim Gibbons, urging Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to lift the moratorium and start accepting applications to build solar power plants on public lands.


Most Popular Stories
  • Buyout to take casino parent private
  • BEST PLACES TO WORK: The readers have voted: These Southern Nevada companies know how to keep workers happy
  • Chase makes takeover official
  • REAL ESTATE: Homebuilders hunt for land
  • INSIDE GAMING: Sanitizing slots, cards a priority for casinos
  • TIVOLI VILLAGE: Work intensifies at mixed-use center, with first phase to open in December 2010
  • CityCenter licensing gets own hearing
  • NEVADAN AT WORK: Twenty-year veteran of openings prepares for CityCenter
  • Vote paves way for LV-style casinos in Ohio
  • Holiday office parties take hit




  • The issue dates back to May 29 when the bureau said it would stop taking applications from developers to build solar thermal power plants, sometimes called concentrating solar plants, on federal land. The bureau is developing rules for dealing with applications.

    The agency had said it would continue processing 125 pending solar applications but would not accept new ones for the next 22 months while the new rules are prepared.

    Solar developers complained that the move was creating a barrier for new power plants just as the industry was taking off.

    BLM Director James Caswell on Wednesday announced that the agency listened to complaints aired at public meetings and decided to reverse its decision.

    Reid said Monday during a ceremony for a new solar power assembly plant in Las Vegas that the moratorium would be lifted within a few months, "because it is against common sense and fairness."

    In a letter to the interior secretary, Gibbons wrote that the bureau administers 67 percent of Nevada's land, more than in any of the other five Western states affected by the moratorium.

    Therefore, the moratorium "will have an adverse and disproportional effect on our efforts to develop Nevada's solar energy resources," Gibbons said.

    Reid said: "Nevada is the Saudi Arabia of solar energy, and is poised to lead a global clean energy revolution, and we need to do all we can to encourage public and private investment in projects to develop this amazing potential."

    Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said Wednesday's decision was crucial.

    "We are just at the dawn of this (solar) industry making a significant contribution to our energy portfolio," Resch said. "This is going to be one of the fastest growing segments of the energy industry going forward."

    Resch called the Desert Southwest "the best location in the world to build solar plants." He predicted dozens of concentrating solar plants will be generating power in the Southwest within 10 years.

    The utility-size plants use mirrors to focus the sun's heat to turn water into steam that is used to turn electricity-generating turbines.

    Nevada Solar One, which Acciona Energy completed last summer at Boulder City, is a concentrating solar thermal plant. Ausra, the Palo Alto, Calif.-based company that opened a solar thermal assembly plant in Las Vegas on Monday, uses similar technology.

    The bureau's decision is "welcome news," Ausra Vice President Holly Gordon said Wednesday.

    "With our environmentally sound and reliable technology, we look forward to working with the BLM as their review process moves forward," Gordon said.

    Charles Benjamin, Nevada director of Western Resource Advocates, said the bureau should take time to study plant sites carefully. But he added that he favors solar energy as an alternative to coal- and natural gas-fired plants that contribute to global warming with carbon dioxide pollution.

    Contact reporter John G. Edwards at jedwards@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0420.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 10 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    fireofenergy wrote on July 04, 2008 11:08 AM: Right on. I may have helped (a very small amount) by emailing the BLM about this issue. I basicly said that renewable energy is our only hope for continued survival (as we do today). And that the deserts need to be opened up for solar thermal. Not only would millions of large mirrors generate juice needed to displace the fossil fuels that will soon run out and already cost too much, mirrors would REFLECT the bright light next to the sun back in to space, thus making up for the lack of reflection (or albedo) from melting glaciers. As seen from space, mirrored covered deserts would glisten and PROVE that humanity can stop GW!


    Report abuse

    Go Solar wrote on July 03, 2008 08:52 PM: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” -- George Santayana

    Regarding nuclear power in France: The French people have a greater respect for their “technocrats” in civil service (see "Why the French like nuclear energy" at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html); not the same situation in the United States.

    Plus France doesn't have "affirmative action" or the illegal immigration problem that the United States has. In fact, France's laws passed in 1978 prevent any ethnic data to be collected on its people. Can you imagine if people were hired to work in a nuclear reactor with "diversity" as a hiring consideration? (To be clear: Hiring should always be based on merit, and all other factors should be ignored.) What if illegal immigrants were cleaning the toilets in the nuclear power plant? You know that would eventually happen in the US, and it would be huge security risk.

    Ditto the above concerns for offshore oil drilling, especially because of the 1969 offshore oil drilling disaster that flooded the beaches of Santa Barbara, California, with 3 million gallons of crude oil and killed thousands of wildlife -- birds, dolphins, and seals.

    Transportation of nuclear waste is also different. France's land area is about 7% of the size of the United States (and about twice the size of Nevada.) Therefore, in France, it's easier to maintain security over the trucking routes that would haul nuclear waste from one end of the country to the final repository.

    There's an earthquake fault underneath Yucca Mountain. (Source:” Yucca fault line might spring surprise” by Keith Rogers, The Las Vegas Review Journal September 24, 2007, at http://www.lvrj.com/news/9954856.html)




    Report abuse

    Roger King wrote on July 03, 2008 04:45 PM: "AMERICA'S LACK OF ENERGY POLICY" How much longer can America go without a workable energy policy that puts Americans first? How can so many be against and not even consider new drilling by our oil companies when the countries around the world drill and produce oil safely everyday of the year? How can so many be against using the Yucca Mt. site in the Nevada as a nuclear depository when it is the most stable area in the world, and the most studied by scientists ever in the history of the world? How can so many citizens be against building nuclear power plants in this country when France has safely produced over 80% of its power with nuclear plants over the past 30 years? How can enviros, who have done such great work in the past 40 years, now stand against building transmissions lines from wind and solar farms to the cities they must serve? We need our Presidential candidates to unify and propose a understandable, reasonable, urgent national energy policy that puts Americans first. We can do it. It is one of the changes we must now have. Congress must act now and produce this energy policy for the first time in our nation’s history. We can't wait another 40 years. Thank you.


    Report abuse

    Why heat dirt? wrote on July 03, 2008 03:13 PM: Kudos and big applause to Governor Jim Gibbons for writing that letter, because it shows he's NOT in lockstep with the coal/nuclear industries and that he's wielding his power for alternative energy sources -- and thereby, our national security.

    As "ths" mentions, only a small amount of Nevada's land is required to cover all of the electricity needs of the United States. (Source: Ira Flatow (host) with guests Evan Schwartz and Rhone Resch (2008-02-01). “A Bright Future for Solar Energy?” Talk of the Nation - Science Friday, National Public Radio; you can listen to their discussion for free at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88239836)

    The US Federal Government, via its Bureau of Land Management, controls at least 67% of the land in Nevada. Currently all of that sunlight over the area is being wasted just heating the dirt and the air.

    Why heat dirt and air?

    And when it comes to nuclear reactors, no engineering can prepare for ALL possibilities of unpredictable human behavior (such as internal sabotage or mistakes) and Mother Nature (such as earthquakes). Therefore, what is the consequence when the engineering designs fail or are bypassed?

    If all you have are broken mirrors, then no problem.

    If you have a nuclear meltdown or radioactive contamination in the water supply, then no amount of money will sufficient to compensate for the resulting disaster.


    Report abuse

    ths wrote on July 03, 2008 02:11 PM: Randy, where you getting your facts? We would only have to cover a fraction of Nevada to actually be able to power the entire United States.

    Also Solar Thermal plants can generate power beyond the day time with heat storage in the form of salt pools. There are other forms that are being invented daily from flywheel storage to better battery and capacitor technology.

    We could produce enough power to employee residents and export the power we produce to other states.


    Report abuse

    Donald Osborne wrote on July 03, 2008 11:11 AM: Anybody remember when our Sen. Harry was involved with a former Nv. Government mucky, muck that was involved in the Solar industry. This was his intro. into Solar years ago. Strange he also has bare land positioned just for Solar production for Bullhead and Laughlin.

    It just never ends with these elite politicians and now we have his son and another one in Wash. D.C. that's a dreaded Lobbyist. You don't think that one is involved with Solar do you?
    Rory is involved County wide.
    What a bunch of characters.


    Report abuse

    RANDY wrote on July 03, 2008 10:09 AM: I WOULDN'T BE SO THRILLED THAT WE ARE INVESTING INTO SOLAR POWERED PLANTS. FOR ONE THING, IT ONLY WORKS DURING THE DAY!!! ANOTHER PROBLEM IS IT WILL TAKE A LOT OF LAND TO GENERATE ANY MEANINGFUL AMOUNT OF ELECTRICITY TO POWER CLARK COUNTY. IN FACT, WE WOULD HAVE TO COVER THE ENTIRE STATE OF NEVADA WITH SOLAR PANELS OR SOLAR COLLECTORS JUST TO POWER CLARK COUNTY. I WOULD THINK IT WOULD DAMAGE THE ENVIRONMENT DOING ALL OF THE SOLAR POWER PLANTS. DON'T FORGET ABOUT THE DESERT TORTOISES. WE CAN'T DISTURB THEM. WHAT ABOUT THE COST PER KILO-WATT? THIS IS THE SAME MAN (MR. REID ) WHO THROWS UP ROAD BLOCKS WHEN THE POWER COMPANIES WANT TO BUILD ONE COAL FIRED POWER PLANT IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. IT WOULD GENERATE 10 TIMES THE ELECTRICITY 24 -7 AND NO STORAGE NEEDED. THE PRICE PER KILO-WATT WOULD ACTUALLY COME DOWN. LOWER POWER BILLS. ALL YOU CITY FOLK, CAN PRAISE MR. REID FOR HIS LEADERSHIP. AS FOR ME, I CAN GET MY VEGGIES OUT OF MY GARDEN. YOU CITY FOLK, MUST NOT CARE ABOUT HIS VOTING RECORD DURING HIS TENURE IN THE SENATE. YOU GOT TO ASK YOURSELF ON THING... IS HE HELPING OR HURTING THE COUNTRY'S ECONOMY?


    Report abuse

    FREE ELECTRIC wrote on July 03, 2008 09:45 AM: STOP
    Politicizing Yucca Mountain Harry Reid-

    You get this group or that to participate in your political pandering against a project that would bennifit the average man GREATLY.

    TRADE - free electric for every resident of Nevada

    and let them bring and store safely Nuke waste from all the states and give us high paying jobs to do it!!!

    FREE ELECTRIC


    Report abuse

    Norman P wrote on July 03, 2008 08:29 AM: All you redneck Harry haters seem to overlook the fact that we have a powerful Senator in Washington, and we're lucky to have him.

    Right, Heidi Harris?


    Report abuse

    Russ wrote on July 03, 2008 02:20 AM: ABOUT TIME--now go for wind power--