Soapbox Post

The names have been changed to protect the innocent, but somewhere in rural Arizona, residents are torn.  The opportunity of a much-advertised solar power plant means ‘future jobs and economic security’ to some…and to others it means ‘future water insecurity’.  Big business and government agencies push for ‘green electricity’ – but who speaks for the underground water that is necessary to run the plant?  Arizona’s regulations fail to constrain water usage outside of metropolitan active management areas.  This institutional void leaves the responsibility for future generations’ water to vocal, capable citizens.  The process followed for the Hualapai Valley Solar plant may set a precedent for approval of future wet-cooled merchant power plants in the arid desert.

This week I watched as the Arizona Corporation Commission’s line siting members listened intently and confirmed residents’ apprehension about future water availability.  The developer’s plan specifies installation of a 340 MW concentrating solar power (CSP) plant in a dry lake bed within the Hualapai Valley’s scrub rangeland.  It requires 2400 acre-feet of water per year for wet-cooling – more than that needed for a coal-fired power plant.  Worried residents questioned the use of the aquifer’s vital groundwater to manufacture electricity.  A few community members of Mohave County’s high desert offered pleas in opposition to the developer’s preferred solar plant design.

“I haul water…we live in a desert!  The solar plant will start pumping water out of our aquifer … but they have alternatives.  Of course it will cost more…  Will they destroy our area?  I don’t have all the facts and figures [like these experts].  We need to be logical about this.  Last year we got six inches of rain.  This year we got one-half inch of rain…..  The main concern is water.”

 “I may not be a hydrologist, but I take studies.  I showed the Board of Supervisors the problems with depletion of water.”

Earlier in the afternoon, the developer’s expert – a registered professional geologist with extensive experience – had presented his report on the characteristics of Mohave County’s ground water.  He stated that, “After 30 years – there would be less than one foot of drawdown [in the aquifer].  The amount of available water set aside for 100 years is about twice is as much as they intend to use.  There is plenty of water to use without any impacts.”  His scientific findings supported the developer’s preferred design.  The consulting expert used state-of-the art modeling to predict groundwater availability.  The concerned locals used years of direct observation and experience.  Arizona’s plant siting committee members had to decide ‘whose science counts’ as they established facts of law for the environmental compatibility certificate.

Who will speak for the hidden water as the developers and regulators establish knowledge claims around acceptable water usage?  One could assert that the local resident’s unique information about the area will influence the committee’s decision-making process.  Advocacy for the buried water will depend on the capability of the local folks to express their convictions.  However, those living in the far reaches of the state may lack the ability to speak for the illegible water.  In what ways can the locals offer their views?  What venues could provide a voice to rural groundwater advocates?

Currently, the line siting committee’s hearings provide the only state-level public forum that supports a ‘call to the public’ which engages the multiple competing values of the citizenry.  Arizona lacks an alternative civic venue that encourages the local folks’ opinions and preferences for certain solar energy technologies in the wide-open parched deserts.  Are there other types of public engagement processes that promote a scientific approach to decision-making?  Even for a ‘strong-libertarian’ state like Arizona?  How would you involve the rural citizens in weighing the often competing values of near-term economic benefits with long-term environmental ones?

About the Author: Cyndy Schwartz is a CSPO graduate research associate.