Indy Environment: In the West's push for more renewable energy, Nevada geothermal developers see an opening

Good morning, and welcome to the Indy Environment newsletter.

To get this newsletter in your inbox, subscribe here. 

As always, we want to hear from readers. Let us know what you’re seeing on the ground and how policies are affecting you. Email me with any tips or suggestions at daniel@thenvindy.com.


Earlier this summer, a Nevada-headquartered renewable developer completed an upgrade to boost production at a facility. But the project was not another solar plant. Despite an influx of solar development across the state, it had little to do with whether the sun was shining. If anything, it had more to do with what happens when it isn’t. 

In June, Ormat completed a project to increase the capacity of its Steamboat Hills geothermal complex, off the highway between Reno and Carson City, by roughly 30 percent. The upgrade was a meaningful development at a power plant that has been operating for three decades. But following where that power is going tells an equally interesting story about geothermal’s future.

The facility is sending energy to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to help it meet its renewable goals. Many other geothermal plants in Nevada are doing the same. 

“For the first time in probably five years, we are seeing tremendous attention and contracts being executed for geothermal in California,” said Paul Thomsen, Ormat's vice president for business development who formerly chaired the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada.

Geothermal produced at Steamboat Hills is an emissions-free source of power that uses heated underground water to produce steam and drive turbines. Where solar and wind are intermittent energy sources, grid operators can rely on geothermal plants around-the-clock. 

As states across the West adopt policy goals to decrease the amount of electricity generated by fossil fuels, Nevada geothermal developers see an opening that is only likely to get wider in the coming years. Many states have started to achieve renewable goals by adding large amounts of solar, a cheap renewable resource, to the grid. But on its own, solar can only get you so far. Solar requires another energy resource as a backstop.

Utilities tend to choose natural gas; it’s often the cheapest option. But it’s still a fossil fuel and to fully decarbonize, customers, utilities and state planners are going to have to find alternatives. California’s recent rolling blackouts highlighted this. As the Los Angeles Times reported a few weeks ago, there are many options, including battery storage and giving ratepayers more incentives to conserve power (a big one). My colleague Riley Snyder took a close look at NV Energy and battery storage adoption earlier this week.

The geothermal industry sees itself as an essential part of the mix, but it faces a number of headwinds. The cost of geothermal, compared to other resources, is relatively expensive. 

The industry is still small. Without a strong lobbying force in Washington, D.C., it had not always received the same tax incentives that solar has benefited from. There is also risk involved in locating an underground geothermal resource. Drilling wells can be expensive, especially in areas not already explored, and add to a developer's upfront costs.

Some of that is starting to change. Despite the higher cost associated with geothermal power contracts, the value proposition looks different as customers are inching to 100 percent renewable goals. And there appears to be more interest on the federal level. Congress recently extended tax incentives to geothermal producers, though they are due to expire in December. 

The industry also hopes that more research and development could lower prices over the long-term. The U.S. Department of Energy recently awarded UNR and Ormat more than $15 million in grant funding to support research into geothermal exploration.

Why do Nevada developers care?

In modeling the Western U.S., geologists have found high geothermal potential across the Great Basin, especially in Nevada. The state is seen as an epicenter for the industry.

“There's a lot more resource in the ground than what's already been tapped into,” said Matthew Rosenfeld, general manager of Avalon Geothermal. "We’re not even halfway there.”

Avalon Geothermal is a subsidiary of Cyrq Energy, which operates three plants in Nevada (only one keeps energy in-state). Both Thomsen and Rosenfeld presented to the Legislative Committee on Energy last week. They said the state has more opportunities to procure geothermal. 

It’s not only about electricity generation, Rosenfeld added. Avalon Geothermal offers heating to customers in Reno as a cheaper and emissions-free alternative to natural gas. He said the impact of heating should not be dismissed in conversations about decarbonization. 

“You're still replacing combustion for heating,” he said.


Here’s what else I’m watching:

HEAT AND CLIMATE CHANGE

It’s time for a serious conversation about heat: Almost all of Nevada — along with most of the Colorado River basin — saw mean temperatures in August that either set records or were much above normal (top 10 percent). And it’s not expected to get cooler any time soon. These are not abstract numbers. They have real-world consequences, whether you live in Las Vegas, with the hottest August on record, or Ely, where ten temperature records were set in August. 

Increased urban heat: Similar to the pandemic, heat is revealing and worsening the existing disparities in urban planning across the Southwest. Last week, The Arizona Republic published an important investigation into heat deaths, not only in Phoenix but all around the country. A part that stuck out to me: The story notes that heat deaths often unfold in ways that are harder for us to quantify, compared to other natural disasters. They rise “in a way that would drive dramatic headlines if tied to a single weather event. Hurricane landfalls typically claim far fewer lives.” The Southern Nevada Health District reported that heat-related deaths decreased in 2019 after a two-year rise, but it has not finished its investigation for 2020, the Review-Journal reported. 

Solutions are there, but they need to be vetted: High Country News published one of the most comprehensive stories interrogating how complicated potential solutions are: “To address extreme heat and the other daunting problems of climate change, we need to think in ways we haven’t before.” To understand what we need to do in the future, we need to look at the past.

Listening sessions: Following up on an executive order Gov. Steve Sisolak signed in November, the governor announced the State of Nevada Climate Initiative last week with a new website. The initiative is starting with a series of virtual listening sessions starting later this month. An interesting note: This is not the first time Nevada has attempted to look at climate change. A committee under Gov. Jim Gibbons produced a 70-page report (I’m going through it).


WATER, LAND AND POWER

Utilities regulator to monopoly: “Do not collect $200.” Great story from the Review-Journal on an attempt by Southwest Gas to pass along $4,700 in executive dinner expenses (and much more) to its Southern Nevada ratepayers. Golden Knights tickets, first-class airline tickets. The company told the Review-Journal that it is no longer seeking to include the expenses in its proposed rate increase. Instead, they will likely come out of shareholder profits.

Light bulb efficiency standards: Last week, the Governor’s Office of Energy approved new standards for energy-efficient light bulbs, the Natural Resources Defense Council announced in a blog post. Every common light bulb sold in the state, starting Jan. 1, must meet the standards, according to the post. The standard comes after the Legislature passed Assembly Bill 54 last year. The bill set a minimum standard for light bulbs and required the governor’s office to come up with a regulation. The rule makes small exceptions for commercial use in the hospitality industry.

Clean water rollback lawsuit: The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe is one of three tribes, along with the Sierra Club, suing the Trump administration for rolling back the Clean Water Act, The Hill reported this week. "These changes that cut into the tribe’s ability to protect its waters and fish harm us all,” Anthony Sampson, chairman of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, said in a statement.

Bighorn habitat: Researchers at Oregon State University published a report finding that desert bighorn sheep populations are less vulnerable to climate change when they live in areas with less ecological disturbance. The report looked at herds in Arizona, California, Nevada and Utah.

Tahoe visitation: My colleague Jazmin Orozco Rodriguez reported this week on the uptick in visitation to Lake Tahoe, despite the pandemic and because of it. “The strain brought on by the pandemic combined with the looming threat of climate change threaten to jeopardize various community and bistate efforts to protect the region’s environment and highlight the importance of sustainable outdoor recreation,” she wrote. Increased trash has been a major issue this year. 


ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION

Herbicides and invasive weeds in Tahoe: The Sierra Club is rallying supporters to comment on a proposal aimed at testing the use of herbicides on invasive weeds in a community built on a marsh in south Lake Tahoe. Thursday is the last day to comment, but the issue is ongoing with a long history involving the Clean Water Act, development and how to manage invasive weeds.

SEC complaint: The Center for Biological Diversity told the Securities Exchange Commission this week that a mining company misled investors over the length of its permitting process, the Associated Press reported. The group filed a complaint with the commission over statements made by Ioneer, a company looking to extract lithium in a part of Nevada that overlaps with the only known habitat for Tiehm’s buckwheat, a candidate for state and federal endangered species protection. 

Fast-tracking environmental reviews: The Associated Press also reported that “the Trump administration is seeking to fast track environmental reviews of dozens of major energy and infrastructure projects during the COVID-19 pandemic, including oil and gas drilling, hazardous fuel pipelines, wind farms and highway projects in multiple states.” Nevada is one of those states. The reporting was based on public records obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity.

Indy Environment: The Trump administration rolls back federal water oversight. What does that mean for Nevada?

Fallon Naval Expansion

Your Indy Environment newsletter. Please read, forward, and subscribe.


Last week, the Trump administration finalized a rule eliminating Clean Water Act protections for about 85 percent of the mapped streams in Nevada, the latest turn in a long-running legal and political battle over the scope of the federal government’s jurisdiction to regulate water quality. 

The Trump administration’s regulation, with the backing of industry, removed an Obama-era rule that applied the Clean Water Act to wetlands and seasonal streams that flow only in response to rain or snowfall. These ephemeral streams comprise the vast majority of waterways in Nevada

In some cases, they contribute to larger waterways downstream, raising a pollution concern. As a result, conservationists and environmental groups have raised concerns about the rollback.

Homebuilders, agricultural groups and mining companies pushed back on the Obama-era rule, citing it as an example of federal overreach. In 2015, then-Gov. Brian Sandoval and Attorney General Adam Laxalt, both Republicans, sued over the regulation, blocking its implementation.

State environmental regulators said the state’s rules already protect against water pollution. 

The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) has argued that expanding federal water pollution rules would duplicate its existing regulations, which includes all bodies of water (the Las Vegas Sun recently published an interview with a deputy administrator on this issue).

Under Democratic leadership, Nevada has largely stayed the course charted by Sandoval.

Nevada remained in the litigation challenging the Obama-era regulation as other states, such as New Mexico and Colorado, withdrew from the lawsuit after the 2018 election. Like Nevada, both states are now led by Democratic governors and attorneys general. In April 2019, a letter from three state agencies said a draft of Trump’s proposal was “a considerable improvement.”

On Friday, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto tweeted that “the new #WOTUS rule is bad news, plain & simple,” noting that it removes federal clean water protections for most of Nevada’s streams. 

When asked whether Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak had a position on the new rule, a spokesman referred The Nevada Independent to a tweet Sisolak sent on Monday. The tweet, a retweet of Cortez Masto’s tweet, said NDEP “is evaluating the full impact of the Administration’s rollback in Clean Water Act protections to determine what actions may be necessary to protect NV waters.”

As interesting as it will be to watch whether the state believes new actions are needed, it will be just as interesting to watch who takes them. The executive branch? The Legislature? This is an issue that Arizona is grappling with. Although Arizona supported Trump’s scaled back WOTUS rule, state regulators are looking at ways to address a “gap in protection,” E&E News reports. 

Here’s what else I’m watching:


The Navy expansion: Earlier this month, the military released a final proposal to expand Naval Air Station Fallon. The proposal is a sweeping request so significant that it would affect private and public land in four counties. For about an hour-and-a-half Tuesday night, the public had an opportunity to once again weigh in on the plan during an open house in Fallon. 

Speakers voiced numerous concerns about the plan. Debates about how federal public land (about 85 percent of the state) often pit various groups against one another. Yet in this case, there are many tribal members, ranchers, exploration geologists and conservationists all on the same page — albeit for different reasons. The military’s plan would encroach on land that is sacred to tribes. The land is used for grazing. The land has mining claims on it. The land supports recreation. The land supports wildlife. The military wants to compensate ranchers and water rights holders if their land is withdrawn. But what is just compensation? 

This issue is not new. We wrote about some of the opposition and concerns in 2018, and I’m working on a feature looking at what’s ahead. The military’s proposal, as presented on Tuesday, included some new changes, increasing public access in certain areas, allowing for a bighorn sheep hunt and pledging to complete a study on the impacts to the Greater sage grouse. But many of the people who gave public comment were no longer just talking to the Navy. They were talking to the congressional delegation too. Congress will ultimately be responsible for approving the Navy’s request, and the delegation could make changes to the current proposal. 

Washoe County wants a federal lands bill: And there is a website. 

Geothermal sees an opportunity: As Western states, particularly California, set 100 percent clean energy targets, policymakers are looking for options that extend beyond solar and wind — intermittent energy sources unless they are coupled with storage technology. In that, geothermal companies see an opportunity. Former Public Utilities Commission Chair Paul Thomsen, now an Ormat executive, was quoted last week in an L.A. Times story saying: “Every state that wants to see deep renewables penetration is going to need a resource that can be there 24 hours a day with no carbon. And that’s going to create a continued growing market for geothermal.”


This is important: “The clock winds down on the West’s nuclear downwinders,” via KUNR.

Thacker Pass lithium project moves forward: “U.S. regulators have moved a step closer toward approving Lithium Americas Corp’s Nevada mine for the white metal, launching a review process that could result in final permits to build by 2021,” Reuters reported last week.

Land and Water Conservation $$$: Last year, Congress permanently reauthorized the Land and Water Conservation Fund, known as LWCF. Conservationists are now pushing Congress to go one step further. Every year, revenues for the fund, which accumulate through oil and gas royalties, go toward non-conservation activities to fill out the budget. Environment Nevada, with the Frontier Group, released a report this week outlining how LWCF funds have been used across Nevada. The report recommends that Congress fully fund LWCF: “The next step is to ensure the passage of legislation guaranteeing permanent and dedicated funding for the program, making the full $900 million available each year without it having to be appropriated.”


Clips from the news:

  • Horsford breaks from party, votes against mining royalty bill (Nevada Current)
  • Sprawl, climate combine to hit disadvantaged communities hardest (Nevada Current)
  • Environmental roundtable draws criticism of county lands bill (KNPR)

The Sandoval Years: Shepherding energy and the environment

Solar panels at Apple's solar field in Yerington, Nevada

Fourth of a five-part series examining outgoing Gov. Brian Sandoval’s legacy in politics, health care, economic development, education and the environment.

The get-along governor was not afraid to show his teeth.

When he convened cabinet meetings, Gov. Brian Sandoval, whose second term ends Monday, would tell his top advisers that if they were pleasing everyone, they were lying to someone, recalled Tony Wasley, who serves as the director of the Nevada Department of Wildlife.

“He wasn't afraid, as he put it, to show a little fang once in awhile," Wasley said.

In the nation’s driest state — with more than 85 percent of its land managed by the federal government — issues related to energy and the environment often pose a Gordian knot for policymakers. Nearly every land issue, from citing a renewable energy project to protecting an endangered species, involves an exhaustive list of interests: cities, ranchers, tribes, miners, environmentalists, farmers, hunters, regulators, federal land managers and at times, Congress.

Oftentimes, no one is wholly happy with the outcome of these complex, acronym-laden issues, which typically become the subject of lengthy lawsuits and are reduced to campaign rhetoric. In other words, they can be dangerous territory for politicians should they poke the wrong group.

“Politics are politics,” Wasley said in a recent interview. “However the governor always pursued what he felt was not only right but also [what he felt] was best for the state of Nevada."

Sandoval’s tenure was marked by debates over perennial issues for Nevada: water, land and development. The governor entered the fray in arguments over rooftop solar, siting renewable energy projects, public land expansions, grazing rights, drought policy, and controversial rules to protect the sage grouse, an imperiled bird that reflects the tension between development and conservation. If there was a lodestar to Sandoval’s approach on energy and land issues, his top aides said it was to ensure a balance between economic interests and the environment.

He was a pragmatist, they said, and not an ideologue.

At times, this approach has rankled groups on both sides of the spectrum. Environmentalists were frustrated with Sandoval over his initial silence in the rooftop solar debate, his veto of a renewable portfolio standard bill and his administration’s recent proposal to release about 500,000 acres of wilderness study areas for potential development. At the same time, many exploration geologists and rural counties took issue with the governor’s support for land restrictions to protect the sage grouse, which prompted a lawsuit from the attorney general.

But despite the criticism from both sides, his top aides said he did his homework — and he made the decision he felt was right, even if it meant reversing a prior policy position.

“He’s not a micromanager,” said Leo Drozdoff, the governor’s former director of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. “But he knows his stuff.”

Reporter ask Gov. Brian Sandoval questions about wildfire, invasive species and sage-grouse after an event at the MontBleu Resort in Lake Tahoe on Monday, Sept. 17. (James Glover/Western Governors Association)

A sage grouse plan for Nevada

On Sept. 22, 2015, Sandoval joined two Democratic Western governors and Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead, a fellow Republican, at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge in Colorado. The occasion was to announce a deal between the Obama administration and a group of bipartisan Western governors to keep the sage grouse from being listed under the Endangered Species Act if the states agreed to impose voluntary conservation measures. Sandoval had argued that allowing the bird to slip onto the list would halt mining and energy projects across the state, devastating rural economies. The sage grouse range encompasses most of the state. Accepting voluntary measures, he said, was a better long-term approach.

“He knew the consequences of inaction,” Drozdoff said.

But the plans immediately drew ire, including from Republican Attorney General Adam Laxalt who signed the state onto a lawsuit challenging the plans Sandoval had said he supported.

Sandoval said, at the time, that Laxalt was operating in his “personal capacity,” but the move reflected a broader divide between Sandoval and his own party on the sage grouse issue.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that all the Republican members of the congressional delegation hailed the lawsuit. That rift would continue with the election of Donald Trump, whose administration has attempted to undo parts of the Obama-era plan and other land protections.

But where some rifts are canyons and others are gullies, this was somewhere in-between.

As a spokeswoman for Sandoval noted at the time of the plan’s release, the governor remained concerned about the land restrictions in the original plan. And Sandoval has supported some aspects of the Trump administration’s changes to the original Obama-era plans. For instance, Sandoval’s office said it supported more flexible grazing and the removal of certain habitat designation as focal areas that had limited what activities could take place on public land.

Where Sandoval has remained steadfast is in advocating for rules specific to Nevada.

The 2015 planning process allowed states to develop specific blueprints for conserving sage grouse. And Nevada chose a free-market approach, whereby companies that wanted to develop on sage grouse habitat could offset their impacts by purchasing credits for restored habitat. The Conservation Credit System — a form of mitigation — was a key part of the state plan, but it came under threat when the Trump administration removed mitigation rules earlier this year.

Gov. Brian Sandoval views sage grouse, an imperiled bird that has come to symbolize the debate over conservation and development in the West. (Tony Wasley/Nevada Department of Wildlife).

In an interview with The Nevada Independent in September, Sandoval said he had concerns about the Trump administration's approach since it negated the long process of bringing groups — ranchers, miners, hunters — together to agree on a sage-grouse strategy before 2015.

“We’re able to demonstrate that [the program] is working,” he said. “Don’t take something away that is working. And it took a long time to negotiate that with the mining industry and now the mining industry is a full partner in that regard. That was the point. To preserve the bird, to preserve the landscape and allow a very important industry in our state to continue.”

Since then, the governor’s office has negotiated with the Department of Interior to continue using the state plan, winning a big concession in a draft document in December. A few days later, Sandoval issued an executive order asking the state’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Council to implement Nevada’s plan by creating requirements for developers to mitigate their impact for sage grouse, requirements that the Trump administration had previously repealed.

Wasley called the executive order a “capstone” of Sandoval’s efforts on the issue.

“I really think that shows his desire to provide both business certainty — for industry’s operating on Nevada’s landscape — as well as conservation assurances for the bird,” Wasley said.

Electricians David Livingston, left, and Mario Rojas with 1 Sun Solar inspects solar panels in Las Vegas on Tuesday, March 28, 2017. (Jeff Scheid/The Nevada Independent)

The double-edged sword of deliberation

For those who watched the Sandoval administration, what the sage-grouse debate exemplified was the governor’s desire to bring together varying interest groups to discuss a complex topic. It also showed Sandoval’s commitment to a multi-step process, rather than to one quick decision.

In 2012, after the sage grouse inched closer to a listing under the Endangered Species Act, Sandoval created the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council to explore options for protecting the bird, and the recommendations from that group were ultimately incorporated into the Nevada plan.

“The governor, in many of the things he did in his tenure, brought together all sorts of interesting groups that might not have necessarily [talked],” said Dana Bennett, the president of the Nevada Mining Association who was involved in negotiating the sage grouse plans.

Many said the governor often used his affable nature and his knowledge of issues to his advantage, personally meeting with whomever he had to influence. Drozdoff said this was evident early on in his term, when the governor, as Drozdoff put it, faced two choices: pull out of the bi-state Tahoe compact or advocate for changes to ease development restrictions.

After Nevada threatened to withdraw from the agreement with legislation in 2011 without the development of a new regional plan, Sandoval and Gov. Jerry Brown came together in 2013 to ensure they improved the compact while continuing a collaborative approach to Tahoe issues. During the 2013 session, Drozdoff noted that Sandoval personally met with California legislators during a trip to California, the kind of touch that helped the Nevada governor negotiate.

“They took great comfort that they heard from him directly,” Drozdoff said.

But during his tenure, the governor’s deliberative and thoughtful approach, an asset for creating policy, sometimes worked against him in a fast-moving public arena where everything is politics.

Nowhere was this more apparent than the debate over rooftop solar. The messy back-and-forth between rooftop solar companies and NV Energy over the value of an emerging technology garnered national headlines, seeping into the presidential race as Hillary Clinton weighed in. Others, from Tesla CEO Elon Musk to actor Mark Ruffalo, who spoke at a regulatory meeting, chimed in, too.

As hard as Sandoval tried to stay out of it, solar companies brought him into the debate. Caught in the middle was a governor who deferred to a process underway in the Public Utilities Commission, which regulates the utility and decides how much it should reimburse solar customers for sending excess electricity to the grid under a system known as “net metering.”

A vice president for policy at rooftop solar company Sunrun slammed the governor for his close relationship with top NV Energy lobbyists. The company sued for text messages between the governor’s office and NV Energy. A spokeswoman for the governor’s office fired back, telling Nevada Independent Editor Jon Ralston the claims were “uninformed, false and outrageous.”

At issue was a decision by the utilities commission, a governor-appointed regulatory panel, to reduce the value of credits NV Energy had to pay to rooftop solar customers starting in 2016. Solar companies slammed the commissioners — and the governor who appointed them — for cozying up to the utility. The governor, a former judge and attorney general who had experience in energy as a former lawyer for utility shareholders, said he would not interfere with the ruling.

As a result, the solar industry hammered the governor in public for the next five months. Sunrun and SolarCity stopped doing business in Nevada, leading to the loss of hundreds of jobs.

During those months, the conflict between NV Energy and rooftop solar firms (dubbed the “solarcoaster” by some) escalated as the utilities commission dug in and the governor’s office continued to publicly maintain its commitment to letting the regulatory process play out.

But that started to change in March, as the governor pivoted to a collaborative public process similar to the one used to come to an agreement over how to protect sage grouse habitat. At that point, the governor’s office became more actively involved in diffusing the situation.

“My view is that he did what was appropriate,” said Rose McKinney-James, a former utility commissioner and a rooftop solar lobbyist involved in the negotiations. “The debacle around rooftop solar was extremely frustrating, and it was a very difficult time for us from a regulatory standpoint. When they let us down, to his credit, he intervened. And that intervention is what put the rooftop solar issue back on track by identifying new regulatory leadership to revisit it."

Sandoval empaneled the New Energy Industry Task Force in 2016 to explore legislation to modernize Nevada’s electric grid and fix elements of the commission’s rooftop solar decision. At the task force’s first meeting, Sandoval aide Dale Erquiaga acknowledged that months of criticism over the issue had damaged the state's reputation as a leader in clean energy.

“We would like your advice on how we move beyond that,” Erquiaga said.

Not only had the rooftop solar fight hurt Nevada’s reputation, it had also left an opening for businesses to pursue the Energy Choice Initiative to dismantle NV Energy’s monopoly.

Around the same time that the task force started meeting, Sandoval met with the CEO of Sunrun, which agreed to drop its lawsuit. Over the summer of 2016, his office also tried to broker a deal between NV Energy and solar companies that ultimately fell apart.

But Sandoval’s biggest move came in September when he orchestrated a shake-up of the utilities commission, arguing that it needed “a fresh perspective and new direction.”

"The commission took action,” said Paul Thomsen, the chair of the utilities commission during the rooftop solar debate and a former energy aide for Sandoval. “It wasn't popular. And I think the governor stepped in when he felt that he needed to bring balance to the debate. He commented on the commission decision and voiced support for a happy medium."

Angie Dykema, head of the Governor’s Office of Energy, started with the administration during the peak of the rooftop solar fight, and said the issue was a challenging one. The governor did not want ratepayers to pick up the cost of rooftop solar customers. But at the same time, a key priority was expanding renewables, and Sandoval wanted the rooftop solar industry to remain.

“He wanted that message to be loud and clear,” she said. “And it got kind of muddied, I guess.”

With new faces at the utilities commission and legislation that Sandoval signed in 2017, the governor was able to lure rooftop solar companies back to the state 18 months after they left.

“I know all the solar folks are here — I know we had a little hiccup in between all of this — but without that I honestly do believe we wouldn’t be standing here today with the success that we’re having so I really am pleased,” Sandoval said at the time of the bill signing.

Gov. Brian Sandoval, right speaks while Former Sen. Harry Reid looks on during the National Clean Energy Summit at the Bellagio on Friday, Oct. 13, 2017. (Jeff Scheid/The Nevada Independent)

A business outlook on renewables

Within the Sandoval administration, the rooftop solar debate was a frustrating blip for a governor who had emphasized clean energy at a time when many Republicans had steered away from the issue. Unlike many other Western states, Nevada does not have a thriving coal or petroleum industry. If Nevada wanted to get into energy development, it had to look toward renewables.

Sandoval recognized this, several advisers said, and he viewed clean energy development as a win-win issue: something that would be good for the economy and good for the environment.

Under the Sandoval administration, Dykema said the state saw $7.8 billion in total investment, including capital, payroll and taxes, for new renewable projects. At the same time, the state issued about $861 million in tax abatements to help get renewable energy projects off their feet.

“It was more of an economic development focus,” Dykema said. “His approach to it was [that the state really needed] to embrace these emerging technologies, like distributed energy resources, electric vehicles and rooftop solar. We [needed] to be on the forefront of that and embrace them."

Sandoval, a pragmatic politician, worked across the aisle to achieve many of those goals.

He came together with then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to support the early closure of the coal-fired Reid Gardner Generating Station near Moapa. The ensuing bill in 2013 to close the power plant shifted the state away from imported coal and pointed it in the direction of renewables with the inclusion of a clean energy requirement for NV Energy.

One year later, Sandoval, working with Brown in California, filed a letter with federal regulators supporting the expansion of a regional Energy Imbalance Market to better integrate solar into the power grid. Thomsen, who worked for Sandoval at the time, cited the move as an example of the governor’s ability to work across party lines and broker deals with Democratic governors.

By 2017, 18 percent of the energy generated in the state came from renewables, including solar and geothermal, doubling from the amount produced when Sandoval took office in 2010. About 72 percent comes from natural gas and a sliver — only 7 percent — came from coal, according to the state’s 2017 energy status report. Nevada also benefited from its close proximity to California, with strong renewable goals, exporting new energy to users outside of the state.

Exporting energy, Dykema noted, “is still a win for Nevada.”

Most rooftop solar companies and large-scale solar developers came to Nevada from other states. When it comes to renewables, the expertise of Nevada-headquartered companies largely lies in the one renewable source that is often left out of the conversation: geothermal.

During his tenure, Sandoval actively worked to boost the state’s geothermal industry. His administration helped push for a national geothermal laboratory, pledging $1 million to the effort in November 2017. The state ultimately lost the $140 million in grant dollars to Utah.

The governor’s office worked to support geothermal, which uses the Earth’s heat to produce power, in other ways too. As part of the negotiations with the Navy over an expansion of its air station in Fallon, Sandoval proposed removing wilderness-like protections to offset the impacts on geothermal development from the military’s proposed closure of about 700,000 acres of land.

This move frustrated conservationists, who have argued that it would be possible to promote geothermal without pulling back protections for about 500,000 acres of Wilderness Study Areas.

Environmentalists supported Sandoval on clean energy, but many felt he didn’t go far enough.

While Democratic governors cast their clean energy priorities under the umbrella of climate change, Sandoval avoided using the term for most of his tenure. Instead, he preferred to argue renewables were good for jump-starting the economy, noting their environmental benefits.

“He talks about it as being good for the economy,” said Brad Crowell, who currently leads the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. “In this case, being good for the economy is being good for the environment as well. That doesn’t escape him by any means.”

In a recent interview with The Nevada Independent, Sandoval said his record around energy and creating the state’s electric highway has worked to reduce the impact of climate change.

“I’ve never denied that there’s climate change, and I think what’s more important than answering whether you believe in it or not is what your actions are,” he said. “So I think that Nevada has done a lot of things with my encouragement and signing and sponsoring laws.”

Reid, in an interview, noted that Sandoval regularly participated in or helped host his annual clean energy summits in Las Vegas unless there was a conflict.

“[Climate change is] a tremendously difficult issue and it’s been my issue for a long long time, so I’ve been way out front on that and as far as I’m concerned, he never held me back from doing anything I wanted to do,” Reid said.

Andy Maggi, who runs the Nevada Conservation League, said Sandoval’s environmental record was solid but his record fell short of what it could have been after he vetoed legislation to increase the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard and community solar bill in 2017.

“For whatever reason, he was never able to go all in,” Maggi said. “So I feel like there were some missed opportunities as well. He left some things on the table that would have really solidified his legacy, not just as a governor who was good on clean energy, but a champion.”

At the time, Sandoval said he vetoed the bill to increase Nevada’s renewable energy portfolio to 40 percent by 2030 because of the uncertainty created by Question 3, the effort to strip NV Energy of its monopoly on the state’s energy supply. The ballot measure failed in November.

Without Question 3 in the mix, Dykema said “it would have been a completely different story.”

Sandoval recently told The Nevada Independent that he supports increasing the standard.

Yes, I want there to be a more aggressive renewable portfolio standard and now the next governor, the next Legislature will have the benefit of knowing there is not going to be energy choice and they’ll have a lot less issues that are complicating that,” he said.

Gov. Brian Sandoval speaks at the opening of Ice Age Fossils State Park in Southern Nevada. (Megan Messerly/The Nevada Independent)

Managing federal land

When the governor first came to office, Drozdoff recalled a number of wildfires hitting Northern Nevada. In 2012, about 10,000 people were evacuated in Washoe County because of a fast-moving 3,000 acre fire. As a governor, Sandoval took his role as a fire manager seriously, Drozdoff said.

“He was very moved by fires early in his governorship,” Drozdoff said.

In the basins that pockmark Nevada, the increasing intensity of wildfire remains one of the most potent threats to activities that take place on the state’s public land, from grazing to hunting. But what complicates fire management for the state is the fact that more than 85 percent of land in Nevada is managed by the federal government. This was a fact Sandoval mentioned frequently, and his advisers said he encouraged his staff to work closer with their federal counterparts.

This issue resurfaced last year when Nevada saw the worst single fire in state history. In total, just two fires last year burned more than 1 million acres in Nevada, destroying grazing land for ranchers, habitat for threatened species like the sage grouse and recreation opportunities.

In September, Sandoval told reporters that the federal government could do more to help fighting fires by tilting the balance from a sole focus on fighting fires to fire prevention.

“It takes a lot of time and it takes a lot of management,” he said. “Nevada is 86 percent federal land so the federal government has a very big and important responsibility to do the right thing.”

As with any Nevada governor, the push-and-pull between the state and the federal government was one dynamic that defined Sandoval’s tenure on a laundry list of land management issues.

During his time in office, the Obama administration designated two national monuments: Gold Butte and Basin and Range. When the Basin and Range National Monument was designated, Sandoval criticized the process for bypassing Congress and excluding some stakeholders.

But his response was largely neutral. And again, in 2016, when the Obama administration designated Gold Butte National Monument, Sandoval offered only a tepid response where in states like Utah, Republican governors came out swinging against monument designations.

In part, this was due to Sandoval’s approach: to deal with the political reality as it was.

After the creation of Gold Butte, Sandoval said that once he “recognized the inevitability of this designation,” he said his focus shifted to mitigating its impact on local communities. It was also the result of his relationship with Reid and a strategy to neutralize Sandoval on the issue.

As part of the campaigns for both monuments, a coalition including former Reid staffer Megan Jones built popular support for the designations among businesses and the broader public. As the designation neared, protecting Gold Butte became a popular cause because of its proximity to the Bundy Ranch, the site of an armed standoff between scofflaw rancher Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over Bundy’s decades-long refusal to pay grazing fees.

A monument designation became increasingly inevitable, Sandoval worked with Reid and the White House to address his concerns, such as adjusting the proposed monument boundaries to protect private land and ensure that activities like hunting and off-road recreation could occur.

"Without Senator Reid and Governor Sandoval's partnership, in some way shape or form, we would not have two monuments in the state of Nevada,” said Jones, a partner at Hilltop Public Solutions.

When the Trump administration considered reviewing the national monuments, Sandoval told the Reno Gazette Journal he supported small adjustments to Gold Butte National Monument. President Trump’s former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recommended reductions in the size of the monument, but not to make wholesale changes, as it did in places like Utah.

"The reason we didn't see [large changes] in the final recommendations was probably due to a lot of quiet negotiations" involving the Sandoval administration, Jones said.

The Gold Butte designation, in part, also bookmarked a chapter in the Bundy saga, the state’s most recent brush with the Sagebrush Rebellion, a movement that sprung up in the 70s among Western ranchers who wanted control of federal public land placed in the hands of the state.

As the BLM began rounding up cattle at the Bundy Ranch but before the conflict escalated into an armed standoff, Sandoval, Sen. Dean Heller and several other elected officials criticized what they saw as the BLM’s excessive tactics in resolving the dispute over cattle ranching.

“No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans,” Sandoval said in a statement before the standoff. “The BLM needs to reconsider its approach to this matter and act accordingly.”

Patrick Donnelly, state director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said he rejected the idea that the governor was “moderate” on the environment, especially when it came to public land.

“The Sandoval administration has been a mixed bag for the environment,” he said. “But on the whole, I think he's taken several actions that are detrimental to the future of our public lands."

Donnelly cited Sandoval’s willingness to support any reductions to Gold Butte and the state’s decision to defer a Superfund listing for a former copper mine near the Yerington Paiute Tribe reservation as ways in which Sandoval set what could be slippery precedents for land policy.

Sandoval had to reckon not only with a Nevada constant — federal land ownership — but he was also forced to deal with extreme drought that sapped water resources across the state.

In 2015, Sandoval empaneled a Drought Forum that explored ways to prepare Nevada for future droughts under the strict rules of Western water law. The forum recommended changes to Nevada water law, but many of them are controversial and the legislature did not act on them in the last session. The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources has proposed bills for the upcoming legislative session. They are expected to meet pushback from a broad coalition.

“The Drought Forum and the recommendations that came out of that, I think are a real legacy for the state,” Crowell said. “I think it’s incumbent upon [the Legislature] now to help us enact some of those recommendations from the drought forum so we are actually prepared for the next drought, not just saying ‘we’re not in a drought now so we don’t have to worry about it.'”

Sandoval also chose drought as his focus during his chairmanship of the Western Governors Association, displaying what Drozdoff described as his desire to tackle issues in many venues.

Jim Ogsbury, the executive director of the association, said Sandoval approached the issue from a state-driven perspective, creating a framework for the organization's future policy work.

"He established the template and model for nearly all of the initiatives that have followed."

When Crowell, who came from the Obama administration, first took the job with Sandoval, he said he recognized that the two saw eye-to-eye on the value of the outdoors. This came through in the governor’s commitment to creating two new state parks: the Ice Age Fossils State Park and the Walker River State Recreation Area. Crowell and Drozdoff said Sandoval prided himself on his commitment to the state park system, becoming the only governor to visit all of the parks.

“It’s something he wore with pride,” Drozdoff said.

Nevada Independent reporter Michelle Rindels contributed to this report.