Skip to comments.Disputed Solar Energy Project in California Desert Is Dropped
Posted on 09/19/2009 4:00:43 AM PDT by reaganaut1
A proposed solar energy project in the California desert that caused intense friction between environmentalists and the developers of renewable energy has been shelved.
BrightSource Energy Inc. had planned a 5,130-acre solar power farm in a remote part of the Mojave Desert, on land previously intended for conservation. The company, based in Oakland, Calif., said Thursday that it was instead seeking an alternative site for the project.
The Wildlands Conservancy, a California environmental group, had tried to block the solar development, as had Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, who proposed that the area become a national monument.
The land was donated by Wildlands to the Interior Department during the Clinton administration, with assurances from President Bill Clinton himself, the group says, that it would be protected in perpetuity. But the Energy Policy Act of 2005, a Bush administration initiative, opened the land to the development of solar projects.
We salute BrightSource for their responsible behavior, said David Myers, executive director of Wildlands. A major conflict between the environment and renewable energy is over.
The plant would have been at the heart of a signature valley filled with bighorn sheep and other natural treasures, said Mr. Myers, who added that he hoped BrightSource would now find a more appropriate site.
Representatives of the company did not return calls for comment.
BrightSource, a high-profile company with investors like Google and advisers like the environmental campaigner Robert F. Kennedy Jr., builds large-scale, sophisticated solar plants in the United States, Israel and Australia. It is developing more than four gigawatts of solar power in the southwestern United States, according to its Web site.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
What this shows is that no form of available power generation can satisfy the enviro-wackos.
If it generates enough power to support society as it exist today (or 100 years ago for that matter) the environmentalist oppose it.
On this project I agree with them. Solar power as a gross generation technology is a pipe dream. It is ludicrously expensive and takes up vast amounts of land to produce a tiny amount of power. With out government subsidies it could not possibly compete with a 50 year old coal plant.
What don’t the greens oppose? To understand that you have to realize that the greens are really watermelons, green on the outside and red (communists) on the inside. They, like most of the democrat party, want to live in air-conditioned comfort while the proletariat lives in the forest using our left hands to wipe after defecating.
The dishonesty and hypocrisy of the left is astounding.
BANANA. It is an acronym for Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything (or Anyone). The real goal of modern enviros.
Yep that about covers it.
If you have to break the sod the enviro-wackos are opposed to it.
The greens are Energy Nazis.
No heat for YOU.
No light for YOU.
No travel for YOU.
No aircon for YOU.
(For us, we’ll, that’s a different story. We’re FOA, we get to do what we want.)
“The Wildlands Conservancy, a California environmental group, had tried to block the solar development”
An environment group opposing clean, renewable energy production reminds me of what Jesus said about a house divided against itself; it can’t remain standing.
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? “ - Matthew 12:25b & 26
The Greenies support that notion that hundreds of millions of us peasants should live a medieval style subsistence life style “in balance” with nature requiring no greater energy then that supplied by "natural" muscle power. Of course, they themselves will continue to live their 21st century high power use-age lives while feeling really good about their "concern for the environment.
Greenies are fascist wanna bees. One set of rules for them, a different set for us "less enlightened" peons.
National Monument? - How about erecting an awe-inspiring, breath taking giant statue of the desert tortoise to complete the charade.
Progressive Socialist studied the Central Vally for wind and solar locations back in the 90’s.
Progressive Socialist stopped farming because of a fish.
Now where do you think the Progressive Socialist want to put solar panels?
Friends of Al
Solar & Renewables Ping List
“BrightSource, a high-profile company with investors like Google and advisers like the environmental campaigner Robert F. Kennedy Jr., builds large-scale, sophisticated solar plants in the United States, Israel and Australia. It is developing more than four gigawatts of solar power in the southwestern United States, according to its Web site.”
Interesting point at the end of the article. In an emergy series I’m attending the instructor used a slide that show Google’s headquarters and all the photovoltaic arrays on it roof. that’s where they belong imo - on the roof. Interesting seeing the Kennedy connection.
The whole Mojave Desert area is an awesome place, but seriously...
proposed project = 5,130 acres = 8 square miles
Mojave National Preserve = 1.6 million acres = 2500 square miles
Mojave Desert = 22,000 square miles
A lousy little 100 acre nuclear plant would have produced far more clean, safe, reliable power than this entire 5,100 acre monstrosity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.