Wind power, Humboldt Bay and public interest

Editor's note: This is the first in a two-part series. The second part suggests some the issues an engaged public might want to consider and will be published April 28.

Let's just say it. We, the people living on California's North Coast, have little or no say in whether there will be wind farms 20 to 30 miles from our shore.

We do, however, have a responsibility to consider the human impacts of the reindustrialization of Humboldt Bay on our people, which likely last saw industrialization on the scale now being planned and engineered in the post-WWII timber boom. Locally, there will be legitimate concerns that need to be identified from multiple sources, prioritized and addressed through civic leadership and community engagement.

At the Humboldt Bay Symposium held on April 11,12 and 13 in Eureka, it was often stated that many decisions are being made every day. Almost none of these are in public view. This does not imply a failure of the impressive scientific community but raises questions of civic leadership. The Redwood CORE Hub, an array of institutions convened by the Humboldt Area Foundation to address “climate and community resilience,” has developed an extensive, if unavoidably subjective, list of recommendations that will be submitted to the California Commission on April 22nd. The importance of community leadership and governance is mentioned often, however unlike many other priorities, without development. This is an untimely oversight. Research on governing the natural resource commons indicates that the most sustainable and effective decisions most often are made by those directly affected and who have access to good science and institutional support. See the successful removal of the Klamath dams for a concrete example.

Humboldt Bay is the clear locus of local civic responsibility and concern. When a $2 billion estimate for bay reengineering and construction was mentioned at a recent get-together, it was quickly corrected to $4 billion.

To be clear, renewable energy, with wind and solar at the top of the list, is a core federal priority, with overwhelming backing from the state of California and apparent broad support in our region. Changes in political leadership at the highest levels could derail the wind farms, but even unified regional opposition would not.

In the scores of local discussions that I have witnessed or participated in there is sometimes fear, bordering on panic, that local civic engagement might threaten the project which, for some residents, is tantamount to betraying the Earth.

Not long ago, Humboldt Bay was full of toxic chemicals, the air stank. Teepee burners had recently been outlawed, prior to which our air quality was horrific. One mill owner said that you couldn't see across the street through the smoke all summer long. People now move here because of the bay, its healthy ecosystems, recreation, beauty and clean environment and industry. It may be that we have to risk all of that to save the planet, but that is likely a false choice.

At the Humboldt Bay Symposium, the level of investment in science was exciting and often eye-popping. Passionate concern about the fate of the planet is driving acceptance of industrialization of the bay, and it represents an opportunity for local people to fight for a large-scale piece of the answer to climate change. And a huge amount of money is already coming our way to fund a growing scientific industry, to build careers of established scientists and create opportunity for students. The cash flow, current and anticipated, is all to the good but distorts perspectives.

Community organizations that could and should be supporting civic engagement, and in other instances have done so, are making recommendations for how “community benefit” funds from the wind farm project should be prioritized to regulatory decision-makers. The priority of concerns and the use of community benefit funds to address them, whatever they turn out to be, should be determined through a wide process of community leadership, engagement and priority-setting, not through priorities pre-selected for the community by institutions, as is now happening.

Many in our communities worked hard to dismantle the good old boy system of behindclosed-doors decision-making about public funds and projects. We don't need a new liberal version of the same thing. On the North Coast, we have some great historical examples of confronting tough issues through community leadership and engagement. Think again about removal of the Klamath dams. Think about prioritizing water use by the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District. There is a long list. It is time to get started once again.