+ compatible siting of energy projects: collaboration and dod engagement adc national summit june...
TRANSCRIPT
+
Compatible Siting of Energy Projects: Collaboration and DOD Engagement
ADC National Summit June 22, 2015
Better negotiations.Better decision making.Better results.
+About CBI
The Consensus Building Institute is a not-for-profit [501 c(3)] organization based in Cambridge, MA. CBI provides facilitation and mediation services to help public, private, and non-governmental organizations nationally and internationally reach agreement on complex public policy matters.
CBI works extensively on energy issues and facility siting, including renewable energy facility siting. Recent engagements include a 3-day DOE workshop on Facilitating Wind Energy; post-construction conflict resolution in Kingston and Falmouth, MA; state task forces on wind energy development; wind development public meetings for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management; working group to develop shared criteria for regional wind resource center; and, collaborative processes on bats and wind.
CBI also facilitates collaboration between military facilities and communities around water resources, toxic clean-ups, and radar systems.
+ DOE Workshop
Facilitating Wind Energy: Addressing Challenges around Visual Impacts, Noise, Credible Data, and Local Benefits through Creative Stakeholder Engagement
Three-day course held in March 2011 Based on interviews with leaders in wind energy field and
several researched case studies Included presentations and Q&A with various experts
Objective: to build capacity of state officials to collaborate effectively with diverse stakeholders on wind development policy, facility siting, and energy transmission.
+ A Short History of Wind Siting
Wind siting is a policy problem “If we can just get RPS or other policies in place…”
Wind siting is a technology problem “If we can just get the right site, with the right equipment, with the right
inter-connections…”
Wind siting is an impacts problem “If we can just assemble the right facts and data about wind impacts…”
Wind siting is a negotiation problem Wind, like any other siting problem, requires direct stakeholder
involvement to realize the benefits and overcome the obstacles created by potential impacts
+Mutual Gains vs. Conventional Approach
Conventional Approach Consensus Building Approach
Goal Technically viable plan Technically and politically viable plan
Primary Client Decision-makers Decision-makers and stakeholder representatives
Tasks Data-driven Interest-driven with attention to data developed jointly
Skills Technical Problem-solving
Role of stakeholders
Provide input and advice Build understanding and generate a proposed agreement
+ Wind Siting Disputes: Underlying Theory
Siting conflicts often arise when interests are in
conflict
Insufficient effort is made to listen to and/or respond
to the interests of all the relevant stakeholders
Siting is not a zero-sum problem
+
Avoid conflict
Learn critical information
Make wiser decisions about appropriate placements and design
Build local support and champions
Much easier to avoid problems than fix them later
Why involve Stakeholders Early and Often?
+
Don’t presume that a proposed wind energy facility is acceptable because it meets minimum legal requirements.
Don’t surprise people and announce plans to build something without giving all stakeholders in the area a chance to talk about whether and how a project should be built.
Don’t downplay potential impacts related to construction, noise, wildlife, visual effects, air space, or radar. There are risks and benefits associated with any technology.
Don’t build wind turbines too close to abutters or incompatible entities. Adequate buffers make for good neighbors.
Best Practices for Engaging Stakeholders: What NOT to do
+ Best Practices for Engaging Stakeholders:What TO do
Begin outreach as early as possible, starting with when, where, and how to build and operate wind turbines Start with multiple sites/options on the table
Include all potential stakeholders, including any DOD components within the vicinity or who might use impacted land or air space
Use multiple and interactive methods to elicit and really understand potential concerns: Traditional political meetings and public deliberation strategies are
often insufficient Consider a representative advisory group, involving community leaders
+ Best Practices for Engaging Stakeholders:What TO do
Information must be legitimate, credible, and salient to be effective If questions of science or data are contested, consider joint fact-finding
Engage stakeholders around changes as planning goes forward Be realistic about and proactively plan for potential negative
impacts from the beginning Consider using a skilled, neutral facilitator to manage these
conversations Consider contingent agreements where future actions may be
taken dependent on particular triggers or thresholds.
+
Develop/disseminate guidelines identifying key potential areas of conflict for siting
Include any potentially impacted military components in invitations to collaborative processes or public meetings and hearings
Promote engagement as requirement for state feasibility study grants
Require engagement of all stakeholders before approving projects (via state siting laws or locals ordinances)
Develop model ordinances that require engagement or consideration of potential stakeholder conflicts to support local siting regulation
Promote joint fact-finding and mutual gains negotiation as mechanisms to resolve siting challenges
Support use of neutral mediators to advise and/or assist with process
Encourage Collaboration and Conflict Resolution: What Localities and States can do
+Joint Fact Finding
Joint Fact Finding is a collaborative procedure for
involving those affected by policy decisions in the process of generating and analyzing the scientific and technical information used to inform value-laden decisions.
+ What Joint Fact Finding Does
Bring together stakeholders (including decision-makers and experts) to seek agreement on: Nature of the problem What we know, don’t know, and need to know How to collect, analyze, and present information
Produce information that is: Publically and politically credible Scientifically legitimate Relevant (useful or salient)
An approach to resolve scientific disagreements and maximize public participation
+
Stacie Nicole SmithSenior Mediator, CBI
For More Information
617.844.1124
- or -
Visit us at www.cbuilding.org