Washington -- Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policies discourage the development of solar projects, an executive for Tempe-based First Solar told congressional lawmakers this week.
Frank De Rosa, First Solar's senior vice president of project development, told the House Natural Resources Committee that the permitting process overseen by those agencies needs "common standards, certainty and predictability."
In his testimony Wednesday, De Rosa said BLM guidelines take too much public land off the table and would undermine projects already far along in development. He said approvals on private land can be even lengthier.
But Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Yuma, whose district is a solar power development hotbed, said that what energy companies perceive as obstacles should be seen as protection for public lands.
"Those processes are in place to protect habitats, wildlife, special places," said Grijalva, a member of the committee. "You have to look at all the consequences, intended or otherwise .... If not, you're opening them up to real damage."
Initial guidelines issued by the BLM in March encourage solar development in areas the agency has designated "Solar Energy Zones." The zones represent less than 1 percent of all public lands, and the guidelines would apply to projects under development but not yet approved.
A February map of solar and wind projects that BLM Arizona is considering lists 32 solar projects, but just three are listed as active projects on the agency website. None is approved yet.
DeRosa and other witnesses at the hearing voiced concerns of businesses failing and the United States falling behind the rest of the world in renewable energy.
But BLM officials said Thursday it takes time to ensure environmental conflicts are minimized. Delays aren't meant to hinder business.
"It comes down to resource concerns. How are we addressing impacts on those environments?" said Eddie Arreola, project manager for BLM Arizona's Renewable Energy Coordination Office.
Solar energy companies must submit a habitat conservation plan to Fish and Wildlife if a project might affect an endangered species, on public or private land.
De Rosa told the committee that in his experience, Fish and Wildlife approval takes takes up to six months on federal lands, but it can take up to five years on private land.
Agency officials said Thursday they were not aware of any such substantial delays in the approval process, and were not able to comment on what may cause them.
With BLM and Fish and Wildlife hurdles in mind, De Rosa said private land is a little easier to develop right now for solar energy. But he also said good developers evaluate potential sites thoroughly before starting the permitting process.
"There are good developers and there are novices, and unfortunately there's a lot of novices out there right now," De Rosa said. "A project needs to be bullet-proof."
This week's hearing was the second on potential roadblocks to renewable energy development on public lands. BLM Director Bob Abbey and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement Director Michael Bromwich testified before the committee May 13.
chatmandu002 posted at 8:30 am on Sat, Jun 4, 2011.
Just like the government. Give these solar companies lots of stimulus money then not let them build their solar plants because of some lizard. Our government is so messed up. Gotta love the Socialist Democrat party.
Dale Whiting posted at 10:38 am on Sat, Jun 4, 2011.
First Solar brings our attention to the sort of regulatory reform which is sorely needed. Whether conservative or liberal, democrat, republican, independent or libertarian, green party or animal rights advocate, we need to find ways to do new things that have become vital and necessary to our survival while still insuring the survival of all species. Surely such ways exist! Surely those solar panels will give the lizards plenty of room to bask in the sun and find shade, too.
aaarrrggghhh posted at 11:53 am on Sat, Jun 4, 2011.
Wow chatmandu I'll go ahead and hazard a guess you're a native of AZ. Typical AZ intellect. As for figuring out ways to co-exist, step number one would be for humans to quit breeding so much. I doubt this First Solar exec is telling the truth. What he really means is that it would cost his company money to be in compliance with guidelines that have been developed with the input of wildlife scientists, and this exec doesn't want to cut into his huge bonuses. Typical of too many American business that only care about bottom line and not about the future. We don't see this whininess from European countries where environmental protection is much more the norm and vast executive salaries much less the norm. Shut up First Solar and abide by the laws.
Cerulean posted at 1:39 pm on Sat, Jun 4, 2011.
aaarrggghhh, I agree.