A large bloc of neighborhood associations and citizen platforms of Castile and León has decided to take another step in its struggle against the expansion of biogas and biomethane plants in the community. After months of mobilizations, allegations and attempts at dialogue, these groups announce the imminent filing of a criminal complaint against the Junta de Castilla y León because of the way dozens of energy projects are being processed.
The legal action is directed against the Director General of Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability and against various those responsible for the territorial environmental services of the regional administration. The organizations maintain that, in the management of up to 54 biogas and biomethane projects, could have been incurred alleged crimes of malfeasance, embezzlement of public funds, falsification of public documents and urban planning malfeasance, infractions that, if confirmed, would entail penalties of disqualification and even imprisonment.
Twenty-one associations coordinated against biogas projects
In total, 21 associations and citizen platforms from Castile and León They have joined this judicial initiative, which is structured at the regional level but has a strong presence in provinces such as Zamorawhere a large number of projects are concentrated. Collectives such as Biogas Not Like This – Jambrina in Struggle, Defending the Empty, Avedillo Standing Up, Sanfonpi Standing Up, Stop Biogas Vidriales or the federation Zamora Standing Up They are among the promoting entities.
Residents from different rural municipalities They say they feel overwhelmed by the "avalanche of biomethane projects" proposed in their area. They explain that they have opted to unite and fight in a coordinated manner, considering that they face a “destructive and very real” threat to their way of life, the environment and the health of the affected populations.
These organizations, spread across different provinces of the region, insist that the lawsuit is the result of a long process, in which they allegedly tried to exhaust all administrative avenues available. They claim that they have been sending them to the Board for over a year. reports, technical documentation and allegations about the risks of biogas and biomethane plants, without managing to get these warnings heeded.
From the federation Zamora Standing UpThe group, to which several of these collectives belong, alleges that the regional administration has shown a “no interest” in knowing information other than that provided by the promoting companies themselvesrefusing to acknowledge what the complainants describe as “very serious problems” for the population and the region. Similar episodes of mobilization and protest have resonated in other provinces, as evidenced by cases in local mobilizations.
Among the affiliated platforms are, in addition to those from Zamora, groups such as ARBA León, La Antigua Biogas Neighborhood Association, Healthy Cantalejo Platform, Pinarejos and Western Region Citizens' Platform, La Moraña Stop Biomethane Platform, EslaVida, Respira Farm, Hornija-Bajoz de Pedrosa del Rey, Healthy Melgar de Abajo, Olmedanos for the Defense of their Territory, Free Payuelo, Healthy Villages, Living Villages, Stop Biogas Montemayor de Pililla and Yanguas de Eresma Platform, among others.
A criminal complaint for alleged crimes in the processing
The legal offensive takes the form of a criminal complaint against the regional government, currently governed by the People's Party. The lawyer from Zamora bald pillar, representing the associations, has been in charge of explaining the main features of the complaint, whose presentation is described as "imminent".
According to the lawyer, the lawsuit is filed against the Director General of Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability and the various Heads of the Territorial Environmental Services involved in the processing of biogas and biomethane projects in the community. The accusation is based on the possible commission of prevarication, embezzlement of public funds, falsification of public documents, and urban planning prevarication.
The groups argue that the way in which numerous administrative files have been handled could have generated a scenario of systematic irregularitieswith decisions that, in their view, were made “knowingly” of their potential incompatibility with current regulations. Therefore, they consider the criminal route to be their only remaining option to demand accountability; similar cases have sparked debates about projects in other regions, such as the second floor in Campos del Paraíso.
The associations insist that, if the facts described in the complaint are proven, the alleged crimes could lead to penalties of disqualification from public office and even prison sentences for the political and technical officials identified.
Meanwhile, the platforms point to a possible risk of liability for the Board itself In the future: if the plants were to be built with licenses already granted and, subsequently, their operation were denied for failing to meet legal or environmental requirements, the promoting companies could to claim compensation from the regional government for having allowed projects to proceed that did not meet the required conditions. Cases in which administrations have reacted by suspending permits illustrate this risk, as happened when a municipality temporarily suspended licenses.
Criticism for the lack of transparency and access to information
One of the main focuses of these associations' complaints has to do with the access to public information and citizen participation in the procedure. The residents claim that, in numerous files, the Board has placed “ongoing impediments” to consulting the documentation The completion of the projects; joint environmental assessment problems have strained processes at other points, as reported in the news article about The Watchtower.
The platforms report that, in some cases, The complete files would not have been providedThe information would have been made available late or access would have been concentrated in very tight deadlines, which, they claim, would have seriously hindered the presentation of well-founded allegations.
Furthermore, the groups maintain that the allegations made by residents, town councils and social organizations They have been ignored or dismissed without a sufficiently reasoned response. This feeling of an “administrative wall,” they explain, is one of the reasons that pushed them to go to court after “exhausting all possible alternatives.” In other localities, the citizens’ response has involved consultations and participatory processes such as the public consultation in Las Torres de Cotillas.
The associations accuse the Board of showing a bias in favor of information provided by companies in the sector, to the point that, according to their version, the regional administration has refused to consider studies and data that question the environmental benefits attributed to these facilities.
In this context, the platforms understand that a “lack of transparency and real control” on projects that, due to their magnitude, would have a considerable impact on the rural environment, water, air and the quality of life of the affected populations.
Use of pig farming regulations and doubts about minimum distances
Another of the controversial points included in the complaint has to do with the regulations used to evaluate biogas plantsAccording to lawyer Pilar Calvo, in many cases the following is being applied: the same regulations used for pig farms.
That regulation establishes, among other things, a minimum distance of 500 meters between farmsintended for pig farms and other agricultural and livestock uses. However, the platforms denounce that This requirement would not be met in several biogas projects, despite being industrial facilities with different risks.
Furthermore, the groups point out possible non-compliance with distance requirements to urban centers and sensitive infrastructureIn particular, they warn that some planned plants would be located at a shorter distance than required from villages, scattered housing, gas stations and other facilitieswhich, in his opinion, increases the risks in case of accidents or incidents.
The associations also question the way in which the buildability of the plants is accounted forThey point out that some files do not include all the buildings, storage facilities, and auxiliary elements that make up the industrial complex. This could lead, they explain, to facilities that in practice exceed the permitted building limits without this being clearly stated in official documents.
For the complainants, this set of factors indicates a lax or inadequate application of environmental and urban planning regulationswith potential indirect benefits for the development companies and an increased risk for the immediate environment. Similar conflicts over the location and size of projects have made headlines in other provinces, such as the large-scale plant planned in Huesca.
Absence of emergency plans and digestate management
In strictly technical terms, the complaint insists on the lack or inadequacy of emergency plans in numerous projects. The associations indicate that many files do not include detailed protocols for action in the event of leaks, explosions or other incidents related to biogas, despite being facilities that handle potentially hazardous gases and waste.
For these groups, this lack of specific security planning is especially worrying in rural areaswhere emergency resources —firefighters, health services or civil protection— are usually further away and have fewer resources.
Another key point is the raw material and digestate management, the residue resulting from the anaerobic digestion process. According to the platforms, in many projects Companies are not required to specify from the outset where the organic waste will come from. that will feed the plants, nor either where the enormous quantities of digestate generated will be applied or treated.
The groups emphasize that this is a considerable volume of waste and that, in some cases, The planned plants would not have sufficient raw materials within a 15-kilometer radius to operate at full capacity. At the same time, they maintain that There would not be enough agricultural land within a 30-kilometer radius to spread the digestate without saturating the soil or causing water contamination.
This combination of doubts about the origin of the waste and its subsequent management leads the platforms to classify some projects as “oversized megaplants”whose real viability —environmental, technical and economic— would have to be demonstrated with solid data.
The economic issue: rates, share capital and risk to public coffers
The lawsuit also focuses on the economic and financial viability of the promoting companiesAccording to the associations, the request from integrated environmental authorization It involves the payment of a rate close to 2.900 euros, to which is added approximately the 1% of the total project value.
However, the groups warn that Many of the companies created to promote these plants have minimal share capital., around the 3.000 EurosIn his view, that figure is clearly insufficient to cover the fees, initial investments and possible costs arising from future incidents or liabilities.
The platforms thus propose a double jeopardyOn the one hand, some companies may not be able to meet all their financial obligations, which could lead to unfinished projects or facilities that are only partially operational. On the other hand, in the event of serious problems, bankruptcies, or plant closures, part of the costs ultimately fall on the public administration and, by extension, on the citizens.
Furthermore, the associations emphasize that if the Board proceeds with granting authorizations without guaranteeing strict compliance with regulations, it would open the door to future problems. property liability claimsIn other words, companies could demand financial compensation from the administration for having allowed investments that later do not result in the effective operation of the plants.
In this sense, the groups emphasize that administrative prudence is not only an environmental or public health issue, but also a form of to protect public coffers from potential multi-million dollar compensation claims resulting from rushed or deficient processing.
An open conflict over the energy model in rural areas
Beyond the strictly legal aspects, the lawsuit reflects a fundamental clash over the energy and development model in the rural areas of Castile and LeónNeighborhood associations maintain that they are not systematically opposed to renewable energy, but warn of the risk of turning large areas of the community into a “territory of sacrifice” for large industrial projects.
The groups denounce that many of these plants are being considered in small municipalities, with few inhabitants and limited resourceswhere the capacity to respond to environmental or social impacts is lower. In their opinion, the proliferation of biogas and biomethane projects adds to other pressures on the land, such as factory farms, large wind farms, or photovoltaic plants.
In this context, they demand a more organized and participatory energy planningthat takes into account the actual carrying capacity of each area, the opinions of local residents, and the role of traditional agriculture and livestock farming. They also request that the technical controls, environmental assessments and independent monitoring on this type of project; protest initiatives and public debate, such as the National protest Stop BiogasThey highlight that citizen demand.
The associations conclude that their objective is not only to stop certain cases, but to open a broader debate on how and where new energy infrastructures are developed In Spain, especially in rural areas which, they point out, have already accumulated decades of depopulation and lack of services.
With the presentation of this criminal complaint against the Junta de Castilla y León for biogas projectsThe 21 associations and platforms involved are seeking a thorough court review of the administrative procedures for these facilities, an assessment of whether environmental, urban planning, and transparency regulations have been respected, and a determination of whether any crimes have been committed in the process. While awaiting the court's decision, the conflict surrounding biogas in the region remains very much alive and has become one of the most intense points of debate regarding the implementation of new energy infrastructure in rural Spain.
