Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS OPPOSE OBAMA PLAN TO DEVELOP SOLAR ENERGY
Human Events ^ | 9/13/2012 | Audrey Hudson

Posted on 09/13/2012 2:25:51 PM PDT by neverdem



The Obama administration has identified 285,000 acres of western public lands on which to create solar zones and develop the alternative energy source, but the plan faces opposition from environmentalists who say it will harm the planet.

The blueprint for the solar energy zones calls for 17 large-scale projects that it predicts would create 5,900 megawatts of energy to provide electricity to nearly two million homes.

“Developing America’s solar energy resource is an important part of President (Barack) Obama’s commitment to expanding American-made energy, increasing energy security and creating jobs,” Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement announcing the plan.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says their plan will facilitate a faster and smarter utility-scale development on land that has been deemed suitable for solar projects.

“This is a key milestone in building a sustainable foundation for utility-scale solar energy development and conservation on public lands over the next two decades,” Salazar said in the July 24th joint statement.

The plan also calls for additional solar development on 19 million acres of so-called “variance” areas outside of the solar zones. In total, it could create enough renewable energy to power seven million homes, federal officials say.

But several environmental groups led by the Western Lands Project (WLP) filed a protest with the Interior Department on Aug. 24 calling the plan “deficient,” citing evidence they say suggests that disturbing the soil will release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

“No scientific evidence has been presented to support the claim that these projects reduce greenhouse emissions,” the WLP said. “Indeed, recent evidence suggests that the opposite may be true. Recent work at the Center for Conservation Biology, University of California, Riverside, suggests that soil disturbance from large-scale solar development may disrupt Pleistocene-era caliche deposits that release carbon to the atmosphere when exposed to the elements,” negating any solar development gains.

The groups also cite the relocation or other mitigation efforts to offset the effects on threatened and endangered species as a “severe, unresolved concern.” Those species include the Mojave fringe-toed lizard, flat-tailed horned lizard, golden eagle, desert bighorn and desert tortoise.

Environmentalists say they are concerned the solar zones will devastate “one of the last remaining floristic frontiers in the United States.”

Instead of public landscapes, the environmentalists want the solar projects to be constructed on the rooftops of residential and commercial buildings and parking lots.

“By converting public lands to industrial energy factories in fragile, remote areas with massive requirements for transmission at great cost to ratepayers and the environment, our renewable energy policy is taking the least enlightened path possible, while attempting to create the illusion of innovation and progress,” WLP said.

The solar zones are located in six states including California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah on property controlled by the Bureau of Land Management.

Constructing the solar projects on the public lands chosen will provide “good” potential for transmission and “relatively low conflict” with nature as well as cultural and historic resources, federal officials say. Excluding 78 million acres from any solar development would protect other natural resources.

However, environmentalists say that is not enough.

“Massive solar power plants pose irreversible, long-term, cumulative ecosystem and species level threats to fragile desert and grassland biomes,” says the environmental groups that include WLP, Basin and Range Watch, and Solar Done Right.

In their protest filed with the government, the groups said their activities on public lands, including hiking, camping, photography and studying plants and wildlife would be harmed if solar energy were developed on the affected public land.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; greenenergy; renewableenergy; solar; solarenergy
I agree with the environuts on one thing: renewable energy is an eyesore beyond buildings. But they can't have their cake and eat it too.

Solar energy projects like the uncredited pic or solar panels on buildings require a maximum of surface area for the photoelectric effect or you're spinning your wheels. It's simple physics.

1 posted on 09/13/2012 2:25:54 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All

2 posted on 09/13/2012 2:31:52 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The pathetic EcoPinheads and their supporters should be shipped to mecca for a lesson in ignorance.


3 posted on 09/13/2012 2:32:51 PM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

How do they not choke on all the buzzwords? They’re thicker than smog.


4 posted on 09/13/2012 2:34:34 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soycd
Face it, the “environmentalists” vision for energy will end up leaving us with a manure problem. I've never seen any large-scale “eco-friendly” energy project that the “envrionmentalists” didn't ultimately find “unacceptable.”
5 posted on 09/13/2012 2:38:11 PM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The same idiots are tearing out dams at an astounding rate as well. If you want green energy that actually works and is low cost, hydro can't be beat. Obviously its a different situation in the west but here in the east there are literally thousands of dams doing nothing more than driving property values up and holding energy potential

We're in an all fired hurry to remove all the existing dams that could produce enormous amounts of RELIABLE energy and replace them with windmills that produce energy when conditions are perfect. If there's too much wind they don't work, if there's too little wind they don't work. Solar is even worse because the sun only shines a limited amount of the time. Midwest dams on the other hand are virtually never without enough water and actually exceed capacity much of the time. Unlike wind, when capacity is exceeded, dams simply dump the excess and the turbines keep right on turning.

These are from an ongoing feasibility study for the purpose of refurbishing two small dams in Ann Arbor for energy production. (There are 4 in Ann Arbor with the Barton and Superior already producing electricity) Note the estimated capacity exceedance.

Photobucket

Here is the actual report. The cost is around $4 million each with $1 million being permits and legal fees making the actual cost of around $3 million each. I'm curious about the cost of erecting a windmill and power distribution infrastructure to support them.

HYDROELECTRIC REDEVELOPMENT ARGO AND GEDDES DAMS FEASIBILITY STUDY (pdf)
6 posted on 09/13/2012 2:41:54 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: musicman

These morons will not be happy until we are all back to living in the stone age.


7 posted on 09/13/2012 2:42:21 PM PDT by notpoliticallycorewrecked (Our military does not kill babies, those that commit abortion kill babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Solar panels are obnoxious. Wind turbines are loud, just as obnoxious and kill over 400,000 birds (mostly raptors) per year in the United States.


8 posted on 09/13/2012 2:42:41 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Ah, environmentalists:

They say we need solar power, but then block the projects because they might have an adverse environmental impact and because they’re eyesores.

They say we need massive wind farms, but then block them because they’re eyesores, surprisingly efficient at killing birds, and quite loud.

They advocate geothermal energy, but block the projects because they might adversely affect groundwater.

They say we should use tidal power systems, but then shoot down every proposed location due to aesthetic and environmental concerns.

About the only thing they haven’t proposed then blocked is using corn for ethanol, which is of course driving up food prices and causing shortages in the third world where we used to send our excess crop.

My personal favorite instance is how the libs living in Martha’s Vineyard were the fiercest advocates of offshore wind farms until it turned out that the best location in the country for one is off Martha’s Vineyard. Then they suddenly had high-minded reasons for stopping the Cape Wind Project, nothing more than chagrined, disguised NIMBY, of course.

How long until they propose magic happy pixie dust as an alternative energy source, but then block the fairy ranching operations..? ;p


9 posted on 09/13/2012 2:53:01 PM PDT by verum ago (Be a bastard, and Karma'll be a bitch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

In Israel solar hot water heating is almost standard.


10 posted on 09/13/2012 2:56:46 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soycd

Putting the “mental” in “environmental”. Just released some greenhouse gasses at the screen.


11 posted on 09/13/2012 2:58:35 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Eyesore is putting it mildly. I wonder if that monstrosity can be seen from orbit.


12 posted on 09/13/2012 2:58:46 PM PDT by SkiKnee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
For once I agree with the enviros but not for the same reasons.
First, make sure it's economically viable before you plant square miles of the stuff.
Start with an acre or so of privately funded panels. WHEN it can pay for its own start up and maintenance costs, THEN feel free to expand to another acre.
That way it will grow at the rate it deserves, and you can resolve any birthing pains at a reasonable cost.
Do NOT start with 640 million dollars of taxpayer money only to have it flop like Solyndra.

13 posted on 09/13/2012 2:59:46 PM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
In Israel solar hot water heating is almost standard.

Solar is fine in certain places for specific things like that. Powering entire cities and industries is a whole different ball game. Even here in Michigan I have a bunch of solar powered gadgets but could never rely on it for more than charging a few small batteries.
14 posted on 09/13/2012 3:04:13 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: verum ago
All your examples are explained by one simple observation: environmentalists believe in drastically cutting the human population of the world. They like turning food into energy because it raises the cost of food. The others are frowned upon because hard-core environmentalists do not want additional sources of energy, "green" or otherwise. They believe that more energy makes it easier for human populations to increase. The more food we turn into energy, the less food we have. To hard-core environmentalists, this is apparantly a net-zero situation.
15 posted on 09/13/2012 3:06:40 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Further PROOF that environmentalists do not want ANY solution.


16 posted on 09/13/2012 3:11:02 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I love when the “save the earth” solar people and the “save the earth” environmentalists try to eat each other.

I hope they both win.


17 posted on 09/13/2012 3:17:02 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Does this opposition prove that the “green energy” push is really an effort to deny people energy altogether?


18 posted on 09/13/2012 3:42:45 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

This is why the cult of global warming is losing momentum with the people, environmentalists always construct no win situations, when people can’t win they just do what they want. Enviros complain about every form of energy, every form of getting your food from the store to home, every form of transportation.


19 posted on 09/13/2012 3:50:12 PM PDT by discostu (Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: verum ago
How long until they propose magic happy pixie dust as an alternative energy source, but then block the fairy ranching operations..? ;p

Their preferred solution is for 95% of humans to die and leave the Earth in peace...

20 posted on 09/13/2012 3:52:40 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Ultimately, these guys just want to stand on the hose regardless of the source of energy & bring down the economy. I’ve been saying for years that green is the new red. The green thing is a convenient front, but go to any enviro gathering and the speakers will eventually start calling for an end to capitalism.


21 posted on 09/13/2012 4:05:00 PM PDT by Bigjimslade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: musicman; 11B40; A Balrog of Morgoth; A message; ACelt; Aeronaut; AFPhys; AlexW; America_Right; ...
But several environmental groups led by the Western Lands Project (WLP) filed a protest with the Interior Department on Aug. 24 calling the plan “deficient,” citing evidence they say suggests that disturbing the soil will release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Even Obama's solar panel schemes are NOT good enough for these wingdings.

DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Sea Otters To Save World From Environmental Collapse

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News Site

Latest from Greenie Watch

Latest from Real Climate

Latest from Climate Depot

Latest from Junk Science

Latest from Terra Daily

22 posted on 09/13/2012 8:27:44 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Obama should change his campaign slogan to "Yes, we am!" Sounds as stupid as his administration is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
...disrupt Pleistocene-era caliche deposits that release carbon to the atmosphere when exposed to the elements...

Do these numbskulls ever stop to listen to themselves? They are just insane.

23 posted on 09/13/2012 10:19:45 PM PDT by Rocky (Obama is pure evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

5,900 MW when the sun shines versus the full-time fossil fuel 33,000+ MW the EPA regulations are closing mainly in 2014 - 2016 but with a few next year; and a couple even sooner.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Update-of-Power-Plants-to-be-Closed-by-EPA-Regs-Feb-7.pdf

That solar power will do wonders for charging electric cars overnight.

OTOH, the reduction will save the money otherwise needed to upgrade and expand the grids that are pretty much maxed out. /sarc


24 posted on 09/13/2012 11:23:02 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (Love me, love my guns!©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ApplegateRanch

Thanks for the link.


25 posted on 09/14/2012 12:54:44 AM PDT by neverdem ( Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson