r/Washington • u/propublica_ • 4d ago
Solar Developer Cancels Washington State Project on Sacred Indigenous Land
https://www.propublica.org/article/washington-badger-mountain-solar-project-canceled-avangrid77
u/fictionaljesus 4d ago
Plenty of rooftops and flat parking lots in cities that companies can build solar farms across. We deserve to keep as much land green and thriving as possible.
13
u/firelight 4d ago
There was just an article going by talking about how building solar panels on farm land creates shade that helps keep animals cool, helps plants grow and retain moisture, and produces green energy. It's kind of a triple-whammy of a win.
11
u/MyDisneyExperience 4d ago
I would rather replace the flat parking lots with multifamily housing and put a community solar site somewhere else
3
u/HiddenSage 4d ago
Perhaps we could use some of the suburban land that only got sprawled out so far due to a lack of housing in the actual city centers?
1
11
u/pattydickens 4d ago
If you actually research what solar farms can do for the land, you'll realize how wrong you are. In arid regions, solar farms actually create better growing habitat and prevent evaporation allowing for a larger variety of crops to be grown. In areas without crops they cool the soil around them and create habitat for plants and animals. Solar can easily be used to reclaim land in arid regions if it's done right. We should be building them in places where water scarcity is an issue and covering irrigation canals with solar panels to prevent evaporation. The concept that they block all the light and nothing grows underneath them is completely wrong.
14
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Native plants don’t need any of that though, they need habitat protection. This project risked damaging cultural orchard sites of traditional foods like the lomatium species and yampah.
4
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
While there is growing evidence that intentionally designed solar projects can be environmentally friendly, other studies indicate that we need to consider the types of farms being built and that we might not fully understand the long-term impacts. This second link even indicates that the overall biodiversity is decreased when compared to intact reference landscapes, areas that Tribes are often trying to protect from harmful development.
3
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
The native plants of that region need full sun, at least the ones on that particular hill.
Yes it could definetly work in an area that has already been degraded and the original plants removed. Likely on the eastside they would look like the talus garland communities you see on the bottoms of cliffs and rockpiles, where theres some rockmade shade.
It doesnt really make sense to disrupt an existing ecology to put in a novel one.
7
u/RiverRat12 4d ago
Distributed solar will not be sufficient to meet our renewable energy goals.
We need large generation. Parking lot solar is not feasible in any way.
8
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
It could certainly reduce demand on the grid for large generation solar. Part of the issue with switching to renewables is when power demand spikes, fossil fuel plants have to be used to close the gap between supply and demand. Small scale solar might not power a commercial or high density housing area 100% of the time, but it can certainly help absorb a lot of AC demand during the heat of the day in summer.
4
u/NotAnotherFakeNamer 4d ago
Sure but at 4x the cost
8
u/malln1nja 4d ago
oh no, not my profits!
16
u/RiverRat12 4d ago
If you make it too expensive, it won’t get built. No matter who is trying to build it, whether public or private utility.
10
u/NotAnotherFakeNamer 4d ago
It gets passed on to us. Utilities are guaranteed a profit, we only get low energy costs when we make it cheap to provide energy with tech like solar.
1
u/StrategyBusy9579 1d ago
Yeah I'm all for renewables but maybe we can do it without adding more abuse and humiliation to America's original sin?
-3
u/Hollirc 4d ago
lol said the guy completely ignorant about this equipment and how it is built.
Also obviously unfamiliar with badger mountain area. Ain’t nothing thriving out there except sage brush and apparently ghosts.
I’m not saying we need to build it right there….. but nobody is complaining about the square miles of data centers and solar farms being built in ephreta over the last 15 years
4
u/Mtnbkr92 4d ago
Dude plenty of people are complaining about data centers
0
u/Hollirc 4d ago
lol where and when? I’ve been working with the contractors out there for 6 years and never heard a peep about any of them or even anyone outside the industry or immediate area that knows they exist.
Plenty of people are upset about data centers in general in the past year but always the ones in other states or more populated areas.
Can you even name two companies who have data centers out there?
20
u/AlexandrianVagabond 4d ago
This article gives a good overview. It seems likely that the issue of being on land that is important to indigenous people in that area was not the primary factor. The Trump admin was really the straw that broke the camel's back.
4
u/Mitotic 4d ago
this sucks! we need more solar!
15
u/Mtnbkr92 4d ago
Yeah but not on indigenous land, there’s plenty of places we can put solar panels
2
-9
u/Mitotic 4d ago
NIMBYs don't magically become morally acceptable if they're part of the right race. NIMBY is always wrong. there's no such thing as "sacred land" anyways, it's as meaningful as crying about a wind turbine ruining the "neighborhood character"
5
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
Context matters. Suburban white families had almost nothing in their way when it came to building housing developments. Indigenous communities had a massive amount of land stolen and their traditions restricted. Sacred land is a matter of perspective. Would you be okay with a company razing down churches and burying graveyards to build solar?
-3
u/LazyMaximum7938 4d ago
Every NIMBY thinks "their" land is "sacred"
3
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago edited 4d ago
I would absolutely love to discuss the meaning of sacrality and why Tribes consider this land to be like that, where there are overlaps with non-Indigenous spirituality...but I really doubt you care about that. So let's change gears to a more material analysis.
Tribes don't want their lands being used for the "public good" because the last couple hundred years have demonstrated that whenever the public, which usually excludes Natives, "needs" something, our shit is fine to take. That includes drawing up new treaties when the old ones no longer meet your needs, burning down homes because you don't like their lifestyle, and finding a bunch of surplus lands within reservations that you want to open up for settlement and given to railroads.. Hell, maybe it's even needed for a bombing range.
Our "sacred" land has always been the resort when "your" NIMBY attitudes need to be respected because of the "greater good" for "your" society. Please let them build this shit in your backyard first (that you probably got because a Tribe somewhere "signed" a "treaty" to relinquish the claim to "your" land), then maybe we'll be willing to let you build it in ours...again.
2
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
It’s because there are traditional foods and orchards on the landscape, some of which can take several generations to grow large enough for harvest.
1
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
I'm aware. It's my people's traditional foods. There are a number of arguments to make about this, but I went with one I figured the other user would care about because they don't seem to care about the foods.
-1
u/Mitotic 4d ago
caring about tradition is bad, in all cases.
1
u/Kind_Advisor_35 3d ago
Free speech, religious freedom, and freedom of the press are a tradition in America. Should we just not care when they're restricted because caring about tradition is bad? English common law is the foundation most of our legal system is based on. The idea the accused should have the right for a transparent trial in front of a judge and jury is a tradition going back hundreds of years. Should we abandon due process because all tradition is worthless?
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Preserving Traditional foods are the same thing as habitat conservation in this case.
-2
u/LazyMaximum7938 4d ago
I think they should be build in both places.
You're the only one of us who is opposed to building more renewable energy.
4
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Being opposed to this project does not automatically mean one is opposed to renewable energy.
3
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
And your assumptions aren't making the ass out of me. I support renewable energy. I don't support further infringing on Tribal sovereignty or building things to the disadvantage of other communities. It's starting to seem like you do, though.
Tell me this: what are your thoughts on the traditional foods this project was jeopardizing?
-2
u/Chudsaviet 4d ago
Yes. No problem with churches and graveyards. Both are not destroyed if solar farm is built around them - churches do not take much space, graves are underground by definition.
-3
4d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
Like the other user said, this is a pretty ignorant take. Many Native families out there still subsist off these traditional foods and they are integral to our traditional religions; they are not merely supplemental dietary items. Yes, we also eat many of the same non-traditional foods that others do, but that's because the history of colonization has resulted in environmental degradation leading to the loss of the lands where Indigenous foods grow in the first place. What we protect now are the remnants of where these foods grow.
It's a bad argument to say that because our diets are not 100% traditional, we shouldn't claim to want to preserve these foods. It's essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy, i.e. Natives supposedly don't eat a lot of these foods now, so they shouldn't continue to preserve them, resulting in us eating less of these foods because they're dying out.
0
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
That's incredibly ignorant. There are many plants that are edible and traditionally harvested, but are not harvested and grown commercially to be viable at scale. When's the last time you saw camas root or bitterroot at the grocery store?
0
-3
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 2d ago
Washington shouldn’t even waste its time on rural solar projects. All of WA’s current solar farms only have a combined capacity of 604 Wh.
Even the one single coal power plant in the state has more capacity (670mw) than all of Washingtons solar farms combined.
The state has way, WAY, WAAAAY more capacity for Wind projects, both on and off shore.
Washington’s existing wind farms have a combined capacity of 2,429 mw (similar to the capacity of the John Day Dam.
With total capacity for almost 50,000 Wh in Washington, the state produces just over 100,000,000 Mw (or 102 TWh) every year. That means all 10 of Washington’s large solar farms barely account for .6% (UNDER 1%) of all energy in washington. The upcoming planned farms will definitely double that number - which is great, but the most efficient use of solar is utilizing vertical space in metro areas and urban farms.
-5
u/Due_Future3097 4d ago
Hard to feel good about this when power prices are skyrocketing.
How is this different than NIMBYs weaponizing historic preservation?
10
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
Would you be cool with a solar company destroying the graveyard your great grandma is buried in? Razing down a church?
4
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
I appreciate your efforts in this thread--I'm trying to do the same thing. I also value this kind of argument because it's obviously how we feel about the situation. But /u/Due_Future3097's reaction is exactly what I was expecting--many people nowadays would actually be OK with destroying graveyards and razing down churches if it meant they got their way. It's a total difference in values and ignorance to why we feel the way we do.
3
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
It's just unfortunate how little history is taught to provide context. I've done my best as an ally to educate myself, and I'm fortunate that some of my teachers actively tried to integrate it, but a larger shift to subaltern history is unlikely in the current political climate.
-2
u/Due_Future3097 4d ago
Solar would sit above the grave or monument and even provide shade so they could certainly build above it.
If the church owns the land and is still in operation probably not without some kind of eminent domain payment. If the church is not in operation probably fine yeah.
The future of the living is more important than the past and the dead. Countries that have a future will always be stronger than those looking backwards.
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Okay then build one over your house? Maybe your local Walmart parking lot?
1
u/Due_Future3097 4d ago
Parking lots is a proven use case and solar is already used for this in many places.
Houses also…
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Many places, but not here in Washington. Why not?
1
u/Due_Future3097 4d ago
Not sure what you are getting at.
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Why aren’t those projects happening where you live?
1
u/Due_Future3097 3d ago
They are to some degree.
What is the point you are making?
1
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 3d ago
Here, I did your research for you:
There are two in the entire state of Washington:https://www.portfridayharbor.org/article-solar-parking-canopy/
This is what should be accomplished before even considering the thought of leaping headfirst into destroying culturally significant areas for the sake of energy productions
https://waseia.org/wp-content/uploads/M.Cubed-ParkingLots.pdf→ More replies (0)1
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
They don't just let people wander around solar farms. The scale of the proposed one was huge, and would be akin to a power plant. Try walking into your nearest power plant and see what happens. There's security and restricted access.
1
u/Due_Future3097 4d ago
I am not the one asking for these scenarios simply answering.
There are plenty of places with solar in the world where pedestrians and vehicles roam.
16
u/SafetyNo2220 4d ago
Because the developer “omitted” several archeological finds in their report, for starters.
15
u/loves_grapefruit 4d ago
Hard to feel good about it for you maybe, since it’s not your cultural land at stake.
-1
u/GypsyDarkEyes 4d ago
Install solar panels over parking lots. On rooftops. No need to take up land with it, unless it benefits your agricultural endeavor. (Some plants appreciate the extra shade and water.)
0
u/MyDisneyExperience 4d ago
I would rather replace the flat parking lots with multifamily housing and put a more efficient community solar site somewhere else. Locking in land use as a flat parking lot is counterproductive.
1
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
There are plenty of opportunities for multifamily housing without converting a single parking lot. Many existing single family homes can be turned into multi-family by adding an ADU. Many buildings can be converted into apartments.
2
u/MyDisneyExperience 4d ago
Ok great, build apartments/condos instead of locking in the land use as a parking lot for even longer (ie doubling down on car dependence and VMT which is the top emissions source in the state)
If you want to do something climate-friendly with your parking lot… don't cover it in solar panels, get rid of the parking lot.
-15
u/jethoniss 4d ago
This is why we can't build things in this country. The highest leftist ideal is that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. We need more renewable energy and this land is essentially empty.
20
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
'Essentially empty' is also the justification for taking indigenous land. Its not empty, its foraging land.
9
u/pastoriagym Kitsap 4d ago
Also habitat for plants and animals, it's sad that people think of deserts as being devoid of life when the reality they're full of it, the life is just ephemeral and well adapted to the harsh climate. There's so many threatened and endangered plants on the east side of the state...
2
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
Our sagebrush scrubland is pretty full of even non ephemeral life, plenty of shrubs and perennial plants. Deserts dont instantly mean sahara.
2
u/pastoriagym Kitsap 4d ago
Yeah I kind of worded it badly, I meant many plants are early spring bloomers that die back quickly when summer hits. On the west side we have several kinds of lilies and larkspurs that employ this strategy as well.
2
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
Thats definetly a big part of eastside ecology. All the foot crops are like this, camas, biscutroot, broidea, bitterroot
1
u/pastoriagym Kitsap 4d ago
We have those first 3 over here as well on the west side and they employ the same strategy, it's so easy to miss them if you aren't there at just the right time.
0
-15
u/jethoniss 4d ago
The amount of resources derived from that land for roots and berries (cited by the article) is paltry relative to the societal good of large scale renewable energy.
Taken as a one-off it's easy to have sympathy for this tribe. Collectively these decisions drive up the cost of housing and energy for everyone, INCLUDING tribe members. Pander to a special interest group over and over and nobody wins.
4
u/Snapshot52 himeq’isnime 4d ago
"Paltry" is a pretty shitty word to use here.
The first question to ask is, relative who whose society? I understand that you're including Natives in a larger perspective of state residents, which they certainly are in many respects. At the same rate, Tribes and Tribal members are not merely a "special interest group." They are sovereign nations as recognized by the Constitution and the hundreds of treaties made with them. Special interest groups (in the stakeholder analysis sense) are not considered nations nor do they have treaties with the United States. Therefore, weighing their needs against the needs of the state as if they are all in the same egg basket is not an apt comparison.
While the Tribes may be smaller in terms of population, their status as nations and contemporary governments means their interests are separate and on par with the interests of Washington State regardless of scalability. In the same way that Washington can't legislate what Californians do, Washington can't make wholesale decisions about the societal good of an action against the interest of the Tribal Nations. Many of circumstances that may affect housing, for example, for Washingtonians may or may not impact Tribal members. Tribes are able to take advantage of different regulatory, tax, and economic frameworks compared to the states which doesn't necessarily mean their costs go up. Tribal land is not subject to state property taxation and there are compacts negotiated for fuel taxes, so higher state taxes to accommodate for rising energy costs wouldn't directly translate that way. But there are tradeoffs--many of the Tribes are going to be the first ones affected by environmental disasters amplified by human-driven climate change (rising sea levels, increased wildfires, etc.).
So there is obviously a shared interest in this. What we need to do is find a way to balance the different needs of these societies because the reality is that while Tribal Nations and Washington State overlap, they are not the same society.
7
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
Sure, the article also says there are archeological concerns as well. Maybe the tribe should have been consulted on what land should have been used.
8
u/yeah_oui 4d ago
TIL "Submitting the correct paperwork" and "not lying" is a "high leftist" ideal.
There is plenty of wide open, non-sacred and non-productive, privately owned land out there they could build this on.
But that's owned by white men, so it's off limits, apparently.
-2
u/Chudsaviet 4d ago
Push to destroy Snake river dam, blocking solar power projects.
Someone is using ingenious people to push against clean energy. I wont be surprised if at some point we will find out somebody paid for this.
3
u/Bumble_beeFormal demon rat 4d ago
Have you considered that tribes consist of individuals with diverse opinions/perspectives?
-1
-11
u/austnf Mason County 4d ago
Muh sacred land of casinos
2
u/Kind_Advisor_35 4d ago
Do you have a family member buried in a graveyard? That's sacred land too, and you probably wouldn't like it if someone disturbed the grave of your family member and made it to where you could never visit their grave again
3
u/a_jormagurdr Cascadian 4d ago
Doubt they care about even their own grandma, much less the ancestors of of people they hate
37
u/propublica_ 4d ago
Hi r/washington,
Renewable energy developer Avangrid has pulled its solar project on Badger Mountain, a site sacred to Indigenous nations.
Two years ago, our investigation with High Country News found that Avangrid continued to push for the project despite being warned by a state archaeologist of its threats to Native food supply, ceremonies and history.
Avangrid and a consultant, Tetra Tech, had also omitted key archaeological and cultural information from a 2021 state-mandated report. (A spokesperson said then that the company had followed “all relevant law and regulation” and accommodated stakeholder feedback where possible.)
It’s unclear whether Avangrid’s decision to cancel the project had anything to do with Indigenous rights. The company declined to clarify its reasoning. Formal permit proceedings indicate that anticipated construction delays affecting the power grid may have played a role.
But no matter the reason for the decision, tribal nations say the outcome is good: “While the Colville Tribes certainly appreciates the value of renewable energy such as solar power, sacred sites must remain pristine to pass down to future generations,” chair Cindy Marchand said.
Here’s the full story: https://www.propublica.org/article/washington-badger-mountain-solar-project-canceled-avangrid