Citizens and the Social Sustainability of Energy Infrastructure Siting Project

Southern California Edison’s Alberhill project consisted of the Alberhill substation located in Riverside County, CA and two transmission lines known as the Valley-Ivyglen Project. The projects were intended to meet projected increases in demand within the Alberhill service area and were met with significant public opposition throughout their joint twelve years of environmental assessment by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Largely due to concerns about aesthetic, property value, and biological impacts of the project, CPUC decided in 2019 to approve a modified plan for Valley-Ivyglen and take no action to grant SCE’s certificate of public convenience and necessity for the Alberhill substation.

The Carty II Generating Station was a proposed expansion to Portland General Electric’s existing 440-megawatt natural gas plant in Boardman, Oregon. The project underwent review by the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council (OEFSC) and Oregon Public Utilities Commission (OPUC), garnering significant public concern regarding the environmental and economic impacts of increased gas generation. Environmental and tribal groups led widespread public comment campaigns and protests, mostly expressing opposition to increasing reliance on fossil fuel infrastructure due to its associated greenhouse gas emissions and resulting pressures on domestic gas production via hydraulic fracturing. Thanks in part to this political pressure combined with concerns about saddling ratepayers with the 30–40 year cost of another major energy facility, OPUC decided not to acknowledge PGE’s request for added gas capacity and instead encouraged the company to pursue shorter term contracts for existing resources to fill its capacity deficit.

The Ocotillo wind project was a two-phased wind facility proposed in the Imperial Valley of Southern California on land mostly managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Touted by some as integral to meeting the state’s renewable energy targets, the project inspired mostly public opposition from the outset. Concerns cited by local community groups, Native American tribes, and conservation organizations all centered largely around a desire to preserve culturally significant desert resources and protect local quality of life. Due to persistent community-based opposition throughout the siting process, BLM approved a modified plan that included 43 fewer turbines than what was included in their original application. Additional legal claims about procedural malfeasance and challenges to the technical merits of the project were also raised after the project’s completion, creating significant ongoing conflict even years after the formal permitting process ended.

The Tule Wind project consists of two wind facilities proposed for construction near the rural town of Boulevard, CA. Project sponsor Tule Wind LLC submitted proposals to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to construct 152 turbines collectively between the two sites, drawing significant public controversy about land use and environmental impacts. A small portion of public response to the project applauded the expansion of renewable energy on California’s grid and the economic development benefits for local communities. However, the vast majority expressed concerns about the facility’s projected impacts to local viewsheds, property values, groundwater, and sensitive desert resources such as Native American cultural resources and threatened avian and bat species. Small local communities, Native tribes, conservation groups, and other stakeholders concerned with preserving local landscapes banded together to oppose the project, ultimately succeeding in reducing the size of Tule I and indefinitely keeping Tule II on hold through a series of legal challenges.