By Hannah Grover
Opponents of a controversial East Mountains solar project hope the Sandoval County Planning and Zoning Commission will reconsider its recommendation to approve a zoning change needed to move the project forward.
Opponents, including the Turquoise Trail Regional Alliance and the East Mountain Protection Alliance Coalition, filed appeals following the board’s meeting in December when it voted to recommend zone change for the Diamond Tail solar project.
Sandoval County is planning to host another public hearing meeting, which has not yet been scheduled, according to Daniel Beaman, the director of Sandoval County Planning and Zoning. Beaman responded to questions The Independent sent through email.
Beaman said the county commission will review and rule on the hearings and the county has 30 days from the filing of an appeal to issue a ruling. The appeals were filed in early January.
Beaman said appellants can learn about the county’s decision by either attending or streaming the meeting or by reviewing the meeting minutes.
The Diamond Tail solar project would consist of a 220 megawatt array, plus 110 megawatts of four-hour battery storage. It represents a $450 million investment into the community and could contribute to both grid reliability and economic development.
However, the area where the solar farm would be built is currently zoned for agricultural use and doesn’t allow for generation facilities.
Nearby residents are concerned primarily about the potential that battery storage could catch fire as was seen this month at Moss Landing in California. While battery storage fires are rare, they tend to gain a lot of attention.
But the concerns don’t stop with fire danger. Opponents say the solar project could impact views, water and traffic.
These were all concerns they presented during the hearing and are rehashed in the appeal documents. Those concerns alone won’t be enough to convince the Sandoval County Commission to grant the appeals though. Instead, opponents based the appeals on alleged abuse of discretion and other procedural complaints. Those concerns include the denial of a request to postpone the meeting and allegations that the developer PCR U.S. Investments was allowed to file evidence late, leading up to the meeting. The opponents say they were not able to properly review the late-filed information.
A hearing has not yet been scheduled for the appeals, nor has the county scheduled a commission meeting to rule on the zoning change.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the County Commission approve the zone change, but the governing body is not bound by that recommendation.
If the County Commission approves the zone change, PCR still has several more hurdles to clear before the Diamond Tail project can become a reality.
PCR has not yet secured a customer to purchase the power that Diamond Tail solar is expected to generate. The company said it is pursuing a contract with the Public Service Company of New Mexico, which is currently accepting proposals for future energy generation. Any power purchase or energy storage agreement with PNM would require approval by the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission.
It is not necessary to install battery storage in a solar farm.. There is another solar farm just west of Moriarity, NM where there is no battery storage there. I presume that the farm is run by Central New Mexico Cooperative , I dont know. I dont understand why there is so much fuss about mandating a battery storage to go along with a solar or wind farm.. I think it is a waste of money. It looks like it is a constant attempt to condition the public view that any solar/wind farm must have battery storage which is not true. Battery storage can be installed as a stand alone somewhere along the grid lines by a separate party that serve all kinds of generating outfits that feed the gridlines.
Battery storage can be useful but in limited quantities just enough to allow the grid lines to flow more smoothly similar to capacitors found in electronic boards.. they keep the voltage as smoooth as possible.
I would agree with the local’s opposition to battery storage as unnecessary part of the solar farm project , but I wonder if the locals would reconsider the solar farm if it is without storage … what would they say ? Ask them……………
Is anyone listening ?
My sense from the conversations I’ve heard around here is that there are different perspectives on the solar farm. There’s definitely a group that is primarily concerned about fire, which is a real, existential threat to the area if we were to have a large fire during poor conditions (dry and windy, which happens regularly out here). There’s another group, which is, rightly so, concerned about water usage. It’s a little unclear to me from what I’ve read how much water would actually be used by this solar farm, both in the construction phase and ongoing, but I do know that we are already way over our water budget, so any additional load is problematic. Then there’s a group of people who just don’t want this in their back yard, period, end of subject. I’m sympathetic to their concerns as well, but it must be acknowledged that the concerns about congestion, PFAs coming off the solar panels, and aesthetic degradation of the area are less stark than the concerns about fire danger and water usage. The resounding theme of the opposition is that this is the “right project, wrong place” for it. Given how much open land there is in many parts of NM which is not directly adjacent to an unmaintained tinderbox of a forest with massive amounts of embodied real estate value interwoven, I believe it’s a reasonable request to find an alternative location for this facility. To your point, removing the battery storage would go a long way to addressing that major concern. I do still believe that any additional water usage that is unnecessary to the current way of life out here though should be closely scrutinized by those making decisions.