Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Desert Solar Power Plant a Risk to Air Safety, Say Pilots
Pilots flying both private and commercial aircraft near Las Vegas have filed complaints about possible unsafe conditions caused by a large solar power plant in the Mojave Desert, according to documents filed with a state agency, and Las Vegas officials are urging the plant's designer to do something about the problem. (www.kcet.org) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Interesting squawk. The BLM did address the issue in its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
It may have been returned due to insufficient postage. The builder was supposed to create a mitigation and monitoring plan, but I didn't find it on the website. I did find the following which might be of interest if you are still buried under the recent ice storms and run out of reading material
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) website for documents regarding the Ivanpah project:
http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/prog/energy/pendingapps/ivanpahsolar/fedstatus.html
The link "Public Comments Received" is a 256 page doc of which pp 30-44 is Nevada airport authority on the glare issue:
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/needles/lands_solar.Par.33102.File.dat/ISEGS%20FEIS%20comments.pdf
A Monitoring and Mitigation plan was required by the EIS as mitigation TRANS-3 (Transportation issue 3) but I couldn't find such document posted on the website-
In addition to the Record of Decision, there is a Record of Decision Appendices
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/needles/lands_solar.Par.68206.File.dat/Ivanpah%20ROD%20appendices.pdf
On pages 68-69, the issue is covered under the title
Public Health and Safety (63000)
63180 -Private and Public Airfields/Airstrips
It may have been returned due to insufficient postage. The builder was supposed to create a mitigation and monitoring plan, but I didn't find it on the website. I did find the following which might be of interest if you are still buried under the recent ice storms and run out of reading material
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) website for documents regarding the Ivanpah project:
http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/prog/energy/pendingapps/ivanpahsolar/fedstatus.html
The link "Public Comments Received" is a 256 page doc of which pp 30-44 is Nevada airport authority on the glare issue:
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/needles/lands_solar.Par.33102.File.dat/ISEGS%20FEIS%20comments.pdf
A Monitoring and Mitigation plan was required by the EIS as mitigation TRANS-3 (Transportation issue 3) but I couldn't find such document posted on the website-
In addition to the Record of Decision, there is a Record of Decision Appendices
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/needles/lands_solar.Par.68206.File.dat/Ivanpah%20ROD%20appendices.pdf
On pages 68-69, the issue is covered under the title
Public Health and Safety (63000)
63180 -Private and Public Airfields/Airstrips
Thanks for taking the time to dig. I'm glad yo see there are others that like to ve properly informed.
---//-----
So, basically, the project operator is responsible for conducting the monitoring and creating a plan and paying for same.
The document will state there is some glare. The mitigation the plan will suggest will be for ATC to direct planes to avoid the problematic headings at problematic times in close geographic proximity to the project.
It'll cost money to put on paper. But the solution doesn't seem too challenging to figure out. It's merely common sense. Except once on paper, that airspace will be a no go zone for all aircraft. Everyone will be vectored around, but no more glare complaints, except from the sun, the lakes, the snow, etc.
---//-----
So, basically, the project operator is responsible for conducting the monitoring and creating a plan and paying for same.
The document will state there is some glare. The mitigation the plan will suggest will be for ATC to direct planes to avoid the problematic headings at problematic times in close geographic proximity to the project.
It'll cost money to put on paper. But the solution doesn't seem too challenging to figure out. It's merely common sense. Except once on paper, that airspace will be a no go zone for all aircraft. Everyone will be vectored around, but no more glare complaints, except from the sun, the lakes, the snow, etc.
I fly into Henderson in South Las Vegas once a month. I've seen this facility from the air, and wondered what impact it would have on aviators flying near it. It's incredibly bright, even when you're not flying into the focal point of the mirrors.
A recent article was lamenting the death of hundreds of birds who were unlucky enough to fly through it's 1000F beam of light. Here in West Texas, where I live, we've had hundreds of wind turbines 300 feet high erected all around the landscape. It's reported birds are being killed by the rotating blades there as well.
It seems with every solution to perceived problems, be it global warming or what have your, there are unintended consequences that no one even considered.
A recent article was lamenting the death of hundreds of birds who were unlucky enough to fly through it's 1000F beam of light. Here in West Texas, where I live, we've had hundreds of wind turbines 300 feet high erected all around the landscape. It's reported birds are being killed by the rotating blades there as well.
It seems with every solution to perceived problems, be it global warming or what have your, there are unintended consequences that no one even considered.
Just like wind farms that kill birds en mass, the unintended consequences of so-called "green" energy are never considered in the rush to "fix" the crisis caused by global warm.......er...I mean "climate change"....
We spend billions of dollars and eat up vast real estate with these projects which are only, and even then barely, cost effective with massive taxpayer subsidy.
Aviation is just collateral damage. Oops.
We spend billions of dollars and eat up vast real estate with these projects which are only, and even then barely, cost effective with massive taxpayer subsidy.
Aviation is just collateral damage. Oops.
Unintended consequences are not limited to green energy projects. Most, if not all, major projects suffer from the syndrome. When the parting writing the project proposal has a fiscal interest in its implementation, benefits tend to be buffed and shortcomings/adverse effects minimized. On this project, the EIS (links elsewhere in thread) impacts to aviation are addressed. Much of it focuses on the tower lighting meeting FAA nighttime requirements. There is a very brief treatment of 'glare' in which the developer is directed to write a 'mitigation plan' and 'monitoring plan'. Of course, those two plans are not included in the online documentation. Just out our curiosity, I filed an FOI request for copies to see how far they went before letting that 'underintended concequence' slide.
En mass? Hardly. I kill a bird a week with my car. Imagine how many are killed everywhere by cars everyday. How many birds are killed by toxic chemicals in the air or by habitat destruction from pipelines and refineries? You probably don't have figures for that, since it doesn't fit Big Oil's narrative of alternative energies being unatainable.
Dear Mr. Wiley,
We only have physical copies of the Monthly Compliance Reports. The latest is on my desk, and totals three inches thick. The overall file runs about twelve feet long. You, of course, are free to view them anytime you are in the Needles area.
As a potential substitute, you might check out the California Energy Commission website at:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/ivanpah/compliance/submittals/
They have not updated it for about a year, but have posted four year's worth of compliance reports.
In the most recent 600+ page report, the word 'aircraft' appears twice.
Elsewhere in the Energy Commission's website, I found a letter from Las Vegas Department of Avaiation (see below). Apparently they have a deeper interest in the subject and can do a buch better job of following it.
http://docketpublic.energy.ca.gov/PublicDocuments/07-AFC-05C/TN201847_20140310T145948_ISEGS_Pilot_Visual_Complaint.pdf