But they're not alone, according to one state official, who noted that the push for geothermal power in California is resulting in more projects in areas where there hasn't been geothermal production before.

More than 50 people attended the two and a half hour scoping meeting at Cobb's Little Red Schoolhouse.

The meeting was held to seek community comments on what environmental issues should be considered in preparing an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Bottle Rock Power Geothermal Power Plant's proposed expansion. The report, according to officials, is expected to be completed by next summer.

The plant's owner, Bottle Rock Power GeoResource, wants to build two new well pads near the existing Bottle Rock Power generating facility. Each would have 11 production wells and one injection well, as well as associated access roads and pipelines.

It was reported at the meeting that the expansion project will increase the plant's production from 15 megawatts currently to 35 megawatts, enough energy to serve as many as 20,000 homes.

The operations are located on leased land, much of which is owned by the Binkley Family Trust, with a smaller portion held by the Coleman Family Trust. However, officials noted that the federal government holds the mining rights.

The county hired San Francisco firm EDAW to conduct the EIR. Brent Schroeder, an environmental project consultant with EDAW, was present for the meeting, which was led by Community Development Director Rick Coel.

Staffers from the California Energy Commission, which has jurisdiction over licensing the plant, also were present to explain the state's part in the process. The plant's production and injection wells, including pipelines and access roads, fall under the jurisdiction of the county.

“This meeting is meant to just focus on the proposed expansion project,” said Coel.

He would have to remind those in attendance of that focus on the steamfield expansion several times during the meeting, as frustration over the current plant's operation spilled out into questions about allowing it to further expand.

Those outstanding issues about the existing operation weren't on the table for Tuesday, Coel said.

Schroeder explained that building the new well pads and infrastructure requires both approval from the county and the federal Bureau of Land Management, which also had representatives in attendance.

He said that EDAW will prepare the EIR and another consulting firm will prepare the environmental assessment needed for BLM's federal process. Those two documents will then be combined.

Schroeder asked those at the meeting to identify environmental issues that should be contained in the EIR and not discuss the project's merits. He also asked them to keep the tone cordial.

The public comment period on the report continues until Nov. 12, Schroeder said. The completed report – which will take 10 to 12 months – will look at a variety of issues, from air quality, noise and cultural resources to the physical environment, plus a range of alternative to lessen or eliminate the impacts.

Coel said the draft document should be completed by the end of this year and will have a 45-day public comment period, with additional discussion before the Lake County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.

Bottle Rock Power representative Bob Giguiere said they need additional steam to make the plant operation for efficiently. The new pad locations were identified in the mid-1980s, when the plant previously was operated by the state Department of Water Resources.

The well pads weren't constructed but an analysis showed they're the most appropriate locations for drilling, said Giguiere. Each pad will be 3.2 acres in size, with each having a total of eight acres of disturbed land.

A proposed pipeline would extend from the operation's existing Francisco pad and split to the east and west to the new pads. Giguiere said a second pipeline eventually would be required.

One Cobb resident, Sue Cashmore, pressed officials on why the project was being allowed to move forward. Coel said the company has a right to make the application, and the county by law has to process the application. The Board of Supervisors, he added, has the ultimate say.

Matt Trask, project manager with the California Energy Commission, said the plant originally was 55 megawatts when it was run previously.

He said the energy commission will stay involved all the way through the process.

The Department of Water Resources ran the plant from 1985 to 1990, until inadequate steam led them to stop production and look for a new owner. In 2001 the plant was sold to a private investor and it began operating again in the spring of 2007.

Trask said the plant is producing only 15 megawatts now. By powering it up to 35 megawatts it could provide enough power for as many as 20,000 homes.

He said the governor has set a goal for 30 percent of the state's power to come from geothermal production, and that means they're seeing more project around the state where they've not been before.

Trask said the plant must meet a number of requirements for approval, including mitigating significant impacts. The expansion also must be proved beneficial to the public overall.

The public will be able to submit comments to state's energy commissioners, who ultimately will make a decision on their part of the project. Trask said the meeting likely would take place in Sacramento but, based on the amount of controversy, it could be held in Lake County.

Trask said if the energy commission approved the project, they have an entire division involved in monitoring the plant's compliance. With him was Dale Rundquist, the commission's compliance manager, who Trask said would work with Giguiere to make sure they're following the rules.

If the plant expansion goes through and it reaches 35 megawatts of power production, “From the governor's point of view, that's renewable power and that's a good thing,” Trask said.

Plant's neighbors ask for remedies, accountability

During public comment, statements veered between overall opposition to the plant to more specific environmental concerns.

Randy Fung said he was opposed to the project because of Bottle Rock's past issues. “The history of this plant is totally relevant to the issue at hand,” Fung said.

Fung said the county had failed to provide enough information, and at one point another man, Curt Winchester, stood and told Fung he wanted to hear questions about the EIR, not Fung's personal agenda.

Coel intervened to try to get the meeting back on track, stressing that they needed to start with the environmental issues that would go into the EIR, with the project's merits to be considered in future public hearings.

Fung was concerned about a state document that included estimates that the expanded project would use 200,000 gallons of water a day and have 368 vehicle trips a day.

Hamilton Hess, president of the Friends of Cobb Mountain, said the traffic that the expanded project would have would amount to one vehicle every three minutes. “This is an impossible situation.”

He asked for consideration of impact on property values, noise, roads, lighting and earthquakes.

There also was the potential impact on quality of life. “Who wants to live on a lovely mountain top with a factory at the door?” he asked.

Another concern for Hess was the extensive excavation that's estimated to be needed – approximately 319,000 cubic yards of earth is to be moved. “Part of this involves the decapitation of a hilltop, which is a problem in terms of visual impact,” he said.

Gerri Fletcher and her husband, Kelly, both spoke to the impacts on their home, particularly due to the significant impacts from increased truck traffic along High Valley Road leading to the plant.

With a list of specific impacts in hand, Gerri Fletcher went through them, requesting that the EIR include roads, stormwater, time lines, water storm maintenance – which she noted hasn't yet been completed for the coming storm season – and enforceable language on those issues.

She said the area's residential zoning was inconsistent with the industrial activities taking place at the plant nearby, which has been transformed into an “industrial backyard,” with dust from trucks and gases from the production making conditions “intolerable.” She said she and her family have suffered nosebleeds and headaches from the gas that has invaded their home.

Fletcher also suggested that the EIR should address the plant's continuing compliance concerns. “My real concern is that the county should not be going forward with new EIR until old and new compliance issue are corrected.”

When Fletcher said it didn't look like the county was being unbiased, Coel explained that the county fought to keep lead agency status on the project, rather than handing it over to the state.

“I don't want you guys to feel that the county has picked sides,” said Coel, noting that the county hired the best firm they could for the EIR, and they don't plan to cut corners.

Sierra Club Lake Group Chair Victoria Brandon pointed to conflicts between land use and zoning, and called attention to the possibility of erosion, botanical issues and the need to track the origin of soil that will be imported for fill.

She additionally suggested analyzing the viewshed to better understand how the plant's lighting impacts the neighborhood, and noted the need for an ongoing mitigation monitoring program.

Ron Fidge raised questions of road safety, saying High Valley Road leading to the plant is too narrow and windy for semi trucks to safely drive in the opposite lanes at the same time. He said the plant's operators had been full of empty promises.

“When you're drilling for dirty steam, yes, we have something to complain about,” he said.

Ninety-one-year-old Bill Jadiker, who said the project is “too damn close” to the home he built with his wife 40 years ago is, wanted the EIR to look at the conditions where he lives with his son and grandchildren.

Sue Cashmore said the plant is destroying the area's natural beauty and turning it industrial. She asked when the plant's permits run out. Coel said the permits were granted on 30-year terms, and they should start expiring in 2011 and 2012.

Sharon DePauw said she has issues with air quality and mercury in the air. DePauw, who has lived in the area since 1999, said she suffers from mercury poisoning. Outside monitoring on the plant is needed, said DePauw. “You can't trust a corporation to monitor themselves,” she said.

Dennis Jensen said some people have livestock in the area. He's also concerned about trash and fire danger; one week he picked up 1,000 cigarette butts along the road to the plant, where he took a bag filled with the trash.

“And I'm just worried about my mules, too,” Jensen said.

To offer comment on the scope of the EIR, contact Rick Coel at the Lake County Community Development, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport, telephone 707-263-2221 or e-mail This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

For more information about the plant, including compliance notices and documents, visit the California Energy Commission's Web site at www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/bottlerock/index.html .

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it . Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf .

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (11)

Subscribe to this comment's feed