News

Livermore: Resident groups, developer all appeal county's approval of 410-acre solar project

4 separate appeals filed, including from proponent Intersect Power challenging county-imposed conditions

Three advocacy groups consisting of mostly Livermore residents filed appeals last week to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors opposing the East County Board of Zoning Adjustments decision to approve a proposed 410-acre, utility-scale solar power plant north of Livermore.

"We're not anti-solar," said Chris O'Brien of Save North Livermore Valley, one of the organizations that filed an appeal. "Our issue is the location and the fact that they're pitting the natural environment -- which is very sensitive out here -- versus another environmental step forward, which is solar. Our point is: Do you have to destroy one to have the other? And we think the answer is no."

Friends of Livermore and Friends of Open Space & Vineyards submitted separate appeals as well, echoing similar sentiments in citing their objections to the Aramis Renewable Energy Project proposed by San Francisco-based Intersect Power -- which also filed its own appeal to the Board of Supervisors challenging multiple zoning board-imposed conditions of approval.

During its meeting on Nov. 24, the zoning board approved the plan to develop an estimated total of 580 acres of land, with 410 of those acres containing solar panels and support facilities approximately two miles north of the Livermore city limits and Interstate 580 in unincorporated Alameda County.

However, opponents argue that the development poses a threat to the natural environment of the rural area and violates provisions of Measure D, which was passed by voters in 2000 and aims to preserve agricultural land and open space in eastern Alameda County.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support PleasantonWeekly.com for as little as $5/month.

Learn more

"I suppose if (the Board of Supervisors) approves the project, then (Save North Livermore Valley) will file a suit against the county and look for the courts to answer some of these questions, especially from our side where we think that this is a violation of the zoning and the county's own General Plan," O'Brien told the Weekly.

Tamara Reus of Friends of Open Space & Vineyards and David Rounds of Friends of Livermore both said that their respective groups would support a lawsuit filed against the county by Save North Livermore Valley if the issue reaches that point.

"Our basic opinion is that 320,000 solar panels is not a farm and it is not agriculture. It is a power plant, and you shouldn't be building power plants on some of the last undeveloped fertile soil in Alameda County," Rounds said.

One of the arguments presented by Friends of Open Space & Vineyards is that "the appeal time frame has been incorrectly calculated by the county." Following the Nov. 24 zoning board meeting, a 10-day appeal period began which made Dec. 4 the deadline to submit any appeals.

However, the Board of Zoning Adjustments made some modifications to the original resolution drafted by county planning staff and the final order was not issued until Dec. 3, giving the group less than 24 hours to review the changes and submit their appeal. Therefore, the group is arguing that the 10-day window should not have started until Dec. 3.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Sign up

"It was a combination of a fairness issue and also a due process issue," Reus said. "If the period is supposed to run from the time a written order is actually finalized, then it would seem to me that -- as a matter of due process -- anybody who might be aggrieved by that should have that window to file," she continued, adding that she believes the argument was important to include in the appeal to make sure the county is aware of the concern and addresses it.

While Reus echoed O'Brien in saying that Friends of Open Space & Vineyards is also not against solar energy, she said that the group questions the need for utility-scale solar in the proposed area.

"We think a policy has to come first and the least environmentally disturbing placement should be looked at rather than piecemealing in projects that are going to have environmental impacts and disrupt the agricultural, rural character of the area, the open space values and the habitat values," Reus said.

The third resident group that filed an appeal, Friends of Livermore, commissioned its own mapping study in October to find some alternative areas with solar energy potential. According to Rounds, the study was completed quickly and yielded mostly surface level results but identified significant potential in developed areas in East Alameda County where solar power could go.

He said that although a number of those locations may not be ideal to developers, the study served as an example that if further research is done, they could find that "solar energy needs can be fulfilled without having to cover prime agricultural land in Alameda County."

Marisa Mitchell, Intersect Power's project lead for the Aramis development, said that while she doesn't have a copy of the completed study by Friends of Livermore, she is aware of some of the properties identified in it, including one 300-acre location that is a fully permitted conservation easement property, which she said is essentially a "mitigation bank for protected species," making it unsuitable for solar.

She added that she views the finding as a testament to how challenging it is to find sites with minimal impacts like the proposed North Livermore location.

"Finding a perfect solar site like this in Northern California and in Alameda County is extremely difficult. There are very few areas that have low impacts like this site," she said.

Although its plans were approved, Intersect Power filed an appeal of its own related to two conditions of approval added to the resolution by the Board of Zoning Adjustments.

"The condition being appealed was added in response to a comment from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and it requires a one-mile buffer for eagle nests," the company wrote in its appeal. "This buffer is too large for an active agricultural area with existing noise disturbances from farm equipment and operations. The addition of noise associated with project construction does not warrant an avoidance buffer greater than a half-mile."

The second condition the developer appealed is the requirement for "increased setbacks and agricultural plantings."

According to Mitchell, the purpose of the planned vegetation around the project is to obscure the view of the solar arrays from public view. She said that they chose ornamental plants that are drought tolerant, evergreen and pollinator-enhancing.

However, the change from the zoning board calls for agricultural crops to be planted instead of the decorative landscaping, which she said, "doesn't allow us to fulfill our commitment that we made to the nonprofit organizations that we like to work with -- including Audubon California, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club -- that we would plant pollinator-enhancing, pollinator-friendly species."

In response to the appeals from the project's opponents, Mitchell said that Intersect Power is "not surprised" by them: "This is all a part of the democratic process, and we are happy to have so many people contributing to making this project better."

She added, however, that she feels confident that the project will move forward as the content of the opposing appeals does not present new arguments that haven't already been heard or addressed. "I feel that the planning staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustments made their findings and that if they're comfortable with those findings, the Board of Supervisors will concur with those findings," she said.

The appeals are tentatively set to be heard on Jan. 12, which makes opponents of the project optimistic.

"There will be a new supervisor for our district and I don't know exactly how that will affect things but (Supervisor-elect David Haubert) is on record in The Independent saying that he agreed with our position earlier that a comprehensive solar policy with detailed mapping of appropriate locations for solar should be done before any of these projects are considered," O'Brien said.

Haubert, outgoing mayor of Dublin, is scheduled to be sworn in to join the Board of Supervisors on Jan. 4, succeeding retiring Supervisor Scott Haggerty.

More information about the solar project can be found here.

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now

Follow PleasantonWeekly.com and the Pleasanton Weekly on Twitter @pleasantonnews, Facebook and on Instagram @pleasantonweekly for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Livermore: Resident groups, developer all appeal county's approval of 410-acre solar project

4 separate appeals filed, including from proponent Intersect Power challenging county-imposed conditions

by / Pleasanton Weekly

Uploaded: Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 4:40 pm

Three advocacy groups consisting of mostly Livermore residents filed appeals last week to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors opposing the East County Board of Zoning Adjustments decision to approve a proposed 410-acre, utility-scale solar power plant north of Livermore.

"We're not anti-solar," said Chris O'Brien of Save North Livermore Valley, one of the organizations that filed an appeal. "Our issue is the location and the fact that they're pitting the natural environment -- which is very sensitive out here -- versus another environmental step forward, which is solar. Our point is: Do you have to destroy one to have the other? And we think the answer is no."

Friends of Livermore and Friends of Open Space & Vineyards submitted separate appeals as well, echoing similar sentiments in citing their objections to the Aramis Renewable Energy Project proposed by San Francisco-based Intersect Power -- which also filed its own appeal to the Board of Supervisors challenging multiple zoning board-imposed conditions of approval.

During its meeting on Nov. 24, the zoning board approved the plan to develop an estimated total of 580 acres of land, with 410 of those acres containing solar panels and support facilities approximately two miles north of the Livermore city limits and Interstate 580 in unincorporated Alameda County.

However, opponents argue that the development poses a threat to the natural environment of the rural area and violates provisions of Measure D, which was passed by voters in 2000 and aims to preserve agricultural land and open space in eastern Alameda County.

"I suppose if (the Board of Supervisors) approves the project, then (Save North Livermore Valley) will file a suit against the county and look for the courts to answer some of these questions, especially from our side where we think that this is a violation of the zoning and the county's own General Plan," O'Brien told the Weekly.

Tamara Reus of Friends of Open Space & Vineyards and David Rounds of Friends of Livermore both said that their respective groups would support a lawsuit filed against the county by Save North Livermore Valley if the issue reaches that point.

"Our basic opinion is that 320,000 solar panels is not a farm and it is not agriculture. It is a power plant, and you shouldn't be building power plants on some of the last undeveloped fertile soil in Alameda County," Rounds said.

One of the arguments presented by Friends of Open Space & Vineyards is that "the appeal time frame has been incorrectly calculated by the county." Following the Nov. 24 zoning board meeting, a 10-day appeal period began which made Dec. 4 the deadline to submit any appeals.

However, the Board of Zoning Adjustments made some modifications to the original resolution drafted by county planning staff and the final order was not issued until Dec. 3, giving the group less than 24 hours to review the changes and submit their appeal. Therefore, the group is arguing that the 10-day window should not have started until Dec. 3.

"It was a combination of a fairness issue and also a due process issue," Reus said. "If the period is supposed to run from the time a written order is actually finalized, then it would seem to me that -- as a matter of due process -- anybody who might be aggrieved by that should have that window to file," she continued, adding that she believes the argument was important to include in the appeal to make sure the county is aware of the concern and addresses it.

While Reus echoed O'Brien in saying that Friends of Open Space & Vineyards is also not against solar energy, she said that the group questions the need for utility-scale solar in the proposed area.

"We think a policy has to come first and the least environmentally disturbing placement should be looked at rather than piecemealing in projects that are going to have environmental impacts and disrupt the agricultural, rural character of the area, the open space values and the habitat values," Reus said.

The third resident group that filed an appeal, Friends of Livermore, commissioned its own mapping study in October to find some alternative areas with solar energy potential. According to Rounds, the study was completed quickly and yielded mostly surface level results but identified significant potential in developed areas in East Alameda County where solar power could go.

He said that although a number of those locations may not be ideal to developers, the study served as an example that if further research is done, they could find that "solar energy needs can be fulfilled without having to cover prime agricultural land in Alameda County."

Marisa Mitchell, Intersect Power's project lead for the Aramis development, said that while she doesn't have a copy of the completed study by Friends of Livermore, she is aware of some of the properties identified in it, including one 300-acre location that is a fully permitted conservation easement property, which she said is essentially a "mitigation bank for protected species," making it unsuitable for solar.

She added that she views the finding as a testament to how challenging it is to find sites with minimal impacts like the proposed North Livermore location.

"Finding a perfect solar site like this in Northern California and in Alameda County is extremely difficult. There are very few areas that have low impacts like this site," she said.

Although its plans were approved, Intersect Power filed an appeal of its own related to two conditions of approval added to the resolution by the Board of Zoning Adjustments.

"The condition being appealed was added in response to a comment from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and it requires a one-mile buffer for eagle nests," the company wrote in its appeal. "This buffer is too large for an active agricultural area with existing noise disturbances from farm equipment and operations. The addition of noise associated with project construction does not warrant an avoidance buffer greater than a half-mile."

The second condition the developer appealed is the requirement for "increased setbacks and agricultural plantings."

According to Mitchell, the purpose of the planned vegetation around the project is to obscure the view of the solar arrays from public view. She said that they chose ornamental plants that are drought tolerant, evergreen and pollinator-enhancing.

However, the change from the zoning board calls for agricultural crops to be planted instead of the decorative landscaping, which she said, "doesn't allow us to fulfill our commitment that we made to the nonprofit organizations that we like to work with -- including Audubon California, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club -- that we would plant pollinator-enhancing, pollinator-friendly species."

In response to the appeals from the project's opponents, Mitchell said that Intersect Power is "not surprised" by them: "This is all a part of the democratic process, and we are happy to have so many people contributing to making this project better."

She added, however, that she feels confident that the project will move forward as the content of the opposing appeals does not present new arguments that haven't already been heard or addressed. "I feel that the planning staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustments made their findings and that if they're comfortable with those findings, the Board of Supervisors will concur with those findings," she said.

The appeals are tentatively set to be heard on Jan. 12, which makes opponents of the project optimistic.

"There will be a new supervisor for our district and I don't know exactly how that will affect things but (Supervisor-elect David Haubert) is on record in The Independent saying that he agreed with our position earlier that a comprehensive solar policy with detailed mapping of appropriate locations for solar should be done before any of these projects are considered," O'Brien said.

Haubert, outgoing mayor of Dublin, is scheduled to be sworn in to join the Board of Supervisors on Jan. 4, succeeding retiring Supervisor Scott Haggerty.

More information about the solar project can be found here.

Comments

Joe Reed
Registered user
Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 10, 2020 at 9:43 am
Joe Reed, Another Pleasanton neighborhood
Registered user
on Dec 10, 2020 at 9:43 am

For those who are interested in reading more about the project, I suggest reading the studies and volumes of information available rather than just the comments in the press.
Web Link


Joe Reed
Registered user
Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 10, 2020 at 9:49 am
Joe Reed, Another Pleasanton neighborhood
Registered user
on Dec 10, 2020 at 9:49 am

And...another link here to the Environmental Impact Report:
Web Link


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 10, 2020 at 10:01 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 10, 2020 at 10:01 am

12/10.2020 ALAMEDA COUNTY 410-ACRE COLOSSAL MISTAKE

Question: What is less environmentally disruptive?

(A) 410 Acre Solar Farm - Phase One - Scalable with more land.

(B) Thorium U-233 Molten Salt SMR producing 10 x Power Level of (A) and scaleable to 100 x Power Level of (A) with no increase in land use required all on about 10 acres or less.

10 acres is all that’s needed to scale up to a 1-Gigawatt (1-GW) "Passive-walkaway safe" Thorium plant. The linked video explains Web Link

A greater arch of understanding factor's in to play. We need to eventually sort through all types of power production, consider environmental impacts, consider the implications that drive countries to war, and look at energy alternatives. One alternative is now ready to go. Los Alamos Lab is building their own passively walk-away safe, Small Modular Reactor as an example. Other government military bases are looking to do the same. There are 4000+- active bases in the US.

Wind power combined with battery power is not dependable and leads to power shortages and peak power plant price-gouging that in turn leads inevitably to boarder conflicts and war. Our prime land is consumed needlessly catering to “solar panel and battery power people + wind farmers, (spab’s),” that our politicians can not say no to. Politicians are mostly unaware and believe their constituents are unaware of safe Thorium Small Modular Reactors (SMR).

A BIG PLAY IS BEING MADE ON CONSUMER IGNORANCE

The 410-acres in north Livermore is only the beginning for the spab’s. They are making their play for the entire North Livermore Valley, and just starting with just 410 acres. The power demand is so great, the spab’s know they can fill the entire North Livermore Valley. Who’s going to tell them no in an our ocean of ignorance.

Alternatively we can scale up and generate 1000 x the power generated in the 410 acres using about 10 acres with walkaway passive safety using Thorium 233 reators.

WE CAN REFIT 6705 VALLECITOS RD, SUNOL WITH SMR'S - SAFELY

This could all be safely transferred into the old Westinghouse facility on Highway 84 (6705 Vallecitos Rd, Sunol and provide uninterrupted supply of electricity to the entire SF Bay Area.

We are just now waking up to realize there are safe, reliable, Thorium Molten Salt, SMR alternatives.

Let the solar panel industry stay on rooftops, parking lots and back yards and remote non-ag preserves out in the deserts. For Earth's sake keep them out of the North Livermore Valley and educate the people on why.


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 10, 2020 at 10:19 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 10, 2020 at 10:19 am

Who owns the old Westinghouse plant at 6705 Vallecitos, Sunol?

I find it hard to believe what the data bases are showing.... that Alameda County owns it.

This must be wrong if anyone knows, please advise.


Mike
Registered user
Val Vista
on Dec 10, 2020 at 11:53 am
Mike, Val Vista
Registered user
on Dec 10, 2020 at 11:53 am

NIMBY, Not In My Back Yard is alive and well.

We don't own the land. We are not willing to buy the land. But we won't let you enjoy your land the way you want. Why because we are NIMBY.

Folks, the USA needs more protections for property rights. We have zoning laws, and numerous approvals that projects need to go through before anything can go forward. I think we also need to add a poison pill against lawsuits that seek to delay projects by using the courts. Anyone bringing suit against a development on private property should have to post a bond equal to the economic harm caused by the delay and that bond should be forfeit if that party loses the case. This is ridiculous. Private property is a foundation of our society.

The NIMBY see the world as filled with environmentally sensitive areas to serve their purposes. But if they want something, they are used to getting it by using the courts as a weapon. SAD!


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 11, 2020 at 8:04 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 11, 2020 at 8:04 am

12/11/2020 Pax Romana Our Last Anchor Point?

Although I may remain sorrowfully ignorant of these matters I quote out of context, it appears to me our politicians of today, save a few, live with their eyes closed to the realities surrounding them....as perhaps I do as well.

I sense it is never been more important to live authentically without hidden motive because forces are aligned right now, for the dominant reality to come into focus like a computer image on our screen of life. First it’s fuzzy, then specks of recognition jell, then suddenly it’s clear. The dominant reality ranging from our social behavior to our sciences, seem to perform through such waves of focus. In the meantime we give our allegiances to our last moment of focus, to our last anchor point of clarity, believing we live and serve wisely.

As I read this passage from “Plutarch’s Lives” of Plutarch who lived 2000 years ago, I felt like I was reading current events from the author-translator’s brief summation.

.....”but over nearly all the world known to the ancients was established the Pax Romana. Battles were indeed fought, and troops were marched upon Rome, but this was merely to decide who was to be the nominal head of the vast system of the Empire, and what had once been independent cities, countries, and nations submitted unhesitatingly to whoever represented that irresistible power. It might be imagined that a political system which destroyed all national individuality, and rendered patriotism in its highest sense scarcely possible, would have reacted unfavourably on the literary character of the age.”

The deep state of our current age is our Pax Romana of our day. We submit “unhesitatingly to whoever represented that irresistible power.” The dominant reality takes shape around us as we carry it within us.

The hardest thing to focus on, is the one thing that matters most, the light.

The light is the energy within that shapes the reality without. To see the light, look through your life-lens colored with compassion and you will automatically trigger a chain reaction to a new anchor point of focus in your life. This anchor point seems to grow out of the shadows of compassion as forgiveness that alters you as one let’s go of hidden motives and moves away from hate, away from mockery and into joy.


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 12, 2020 at 10:56 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 12, 2020 at 10:56 am

Hi Elon,

Following up with your urging in the video, Web Link , that we discuss options and not run rabid with a Solar Power + Battery meme..., we need an environmental impact report that reviews and includes a viable alternative Thorium U-233 Molten Salt, Walk-Away Safe, Small Modular Reactor scalable up to 1-Giga Watt on 10 acres in North Livermore, or 10 Acres on the old Westinghouse Reactor Site on Highway 84, in Sunol-Pleasanton area.

Our politicians really have things fouled up. They will not address such sensible alternatives as:

Question: What is less environmentally disruptive?

(A) 410 Acre Solar Farm - Phase One - Scalable with more land.

(B) Thorium U-233 Molten Salt SMR producing 10 x Power Level of (A) and saleable to 100 x Power Level of (A) with no increase in land use required all on about 10 acres or less.

Let's not use up all our prime SF Bay Area ag lands for solar and battery. A lot of us politically agree with you and your vision.... to a point! Open ag space backing up urban areas is Earth Friendly and emotionally supportive to our human needs; building out our prime urban open space covered with wall to wall solar panels backed up by your batteries, may be an important national energy policy, but more sensitivity is needed in the fulfillment of your plan and where you take away our ag open space to implement it. Adjust your plan. Have you even thought about adjusting it? Are you even aware of what is going on here in your name? Step in here and participate. You have a lot of supporters right here in this area that disagree with what you are doing in North Livermore Valley.

Our politicians are frozen with fear, lack of independent thought, and just all seem to be bowing to the runaway meme: Solar and Battery is unchallengeable, regardless of it's actual merits.


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 13, 2020 at 8:40 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 13, 2020 at 8:40 am

CONTACT ELON MUSK
Elon Musk encourages discussion on North Livermore - 410 Acres.

Personal Attention Please Elon Musk,
[email protected]

Re: Preserving Suburban Ag Open Space

Hi Elon,

Following up with your urging in your video, Web Link that we discuss alternatives and not run rabid with a Solar Power + Battery meme.

Nowadays, we can safely do with Thorium Walkaway Safe - Molten Salt SMR's on about 10 acres what solar and batteries do on 40,000 acres.

Is there a reason you have to build out our suburban ag-open space we've worked 50 years to create and protect and administer?


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 15, 2020 at 11:35 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 15, 2020 at 11:35 am

12/15/2020 BROKEN PARTNERSHIP? What's really behind Alameda County’s 410-Acre North Livermore Valley partnership break with Livermore City's Urban Boundary Limit?

Web Link (Mayor Marshall Kamena, Former Mayor of Livermore explains importance of Urban Boundary Limit.)

A trial balloon business template is being forged off a false paradigm that has become a brainless runaway meme we need to rein in. THE MEME: Solar Panels + Battery Back Up ..............is politically unchallengeable.

A main beneficiary (Elon Musk) PROBABLY knows nothing about the template’s locational environmental impact and how many of his own supporters don't want it done this way.

Elon is all about innovation, risk, and disruptive technology innovation and application.

He’s also an alert and hands-on leader focused on other matters currently. He's known for sometimes sleeping on the floors in his assembly plants to bring in the projects.

He appears to be going through a spiritual change. It reported in the news today, he recently sold all his luxury homes and is now acquiring a simple LA suburban home for his family. He's not saying less is more, the way California Governor Brown was pushing. Musk seems to be saying, I'm simplifying my life down to what's important, Family, Innovation, Application and Focus. The vast array of luxury homes he's sold were probably diverting his precious attention away from Family, Innovation, Application and Focus.

I'm not mad at Elon for not knowing what this local Livermore business template is doing. He's probably doesn't even know about it. We need to tell him and draw his attention, even if he is not legally connected. He is Mr. Battery. He is Mr. Electric, He is Mr. Solar Panel. He will probably be the main supplier once this local usurpation of suburban Ag Open Space takes root.

The challenge is not to stop the business template, but to first get Elon to step in and say "Not Here. Not this way."

If this template overpowers Alameda County politicians, it will overpower Santa Clara County and other countries as well. To name a few: The SF Bay WetLands, The old East Bay Salt Ponds, All of North Livermore Valley (not just 410 acres but 2,000+- acres), Large Runs Along Hwy 101 ,,, hold on, that may be a good location. SF Water Company Open Spaces (thousands of acres under high voltage lines), Sunol Golf Course .... hold on, that may be a good location along with the closed gravel pits.

Contact Elon Musk. [email protected] Get him engaged. There's better ways to implement.


Rich Buckley
Registered user
Livermore
on Dec 22, 2020 at 7:05 am
Rich Buckley, Livermore
Registered user
on Dec 22, 2020 at 7:05 am

12/22/2020 Is Thorium Our Energy Future?

Web Link

Los Alamos National Lab is building a demonstration small modular reactor (SMR) on site. They are focused on modularity in reactor design. I suspect the focus will change as designs are tested for lifecycle costs. In any event the public is learning important concepts: (1) modularity means offsite reactor construction meaning quality control and scaling potential. (2) unexpected realization that we can do on 20 acres (including safety zone) what solar + battery backup does on 40,000 acres. And SMR’s are reliable 24/7/365 with “passive walkaway safety,” another new term we’re quickly learning.

Locally in Livermore, people are unset with PG&E gas and electric company in Northern California for a host of reasons. The most resent squabble with PG&E is they have focused all their behind-the-scenes political mussel to cause Alameda County Board of Supervisors to start allowing a solar farm + Battery Vault consuming our local Ag Open Space that has been carefully protected over the past 50 years by mutual agreement voted on by everyone.

In urban areas and their surrounding suburbs, open space is not considered the spot to place intensive 100% ground cover of service lanes and intensive equipment. The general idea is, that sort of intensive use belongs inside the city not using up our precious Ag open-space next to our cities. So we are now mad and looking at alternatives. Los Alamos’s SMR has started coming into focus as we understand the corruptive power-meme the solar industry + battery Back-up plants push (lobby in secret) on county supervisors. Once more the voters are betrayed. The solar industry and battery back-up vault people obviously plan to cover all our valley floor Ag Open Space and who’s going to stop them?

When it’s realized how we can do on 20 acres what solar + battery does on 40,000 acres, the 20 acre solutions start getting our attention. SMR’s window of opportunity is here.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

In order to encourage respectful and thoughtful discussion, commenting on stories is available to those who are registered users. If you are already a registered user and the commenting form is not below, you need to log in. If you are not registered, you can do so here.

Please make sure your comments are truthful, on-topic and do not disrespect another poster. Don't be snarky or belittling. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

See our announcement about requiring registration for commenting.