Related posts:

The idea of collecting solar energy from the upper surfaces of already constructed buildings seems like the least intrusive and most efficient method to utilized light, in my opinion. It doesn’t shade the natural ecosystem and collects/distributes the energy where humans need it.

This is true. A few additional comments:

Obviously, the migration to renewables will be a blend of public and private projects. It’s good to see solar installations on a piecemeal basis on residential and commercial buildings. But clearly we need a real game-changer, and that has to happen at the utility level. And here, PV is one of many competing alternative energy technologies. As I’ve written often, I advocate large solar thermal farms in the southwestern deserts.

This brings me to my other point: the natural ecosystem. With very few (perhaps no) exceptions, generating renewable energy comes at the price of some level of violence to the local environment. In my conversation with Brian Rutledge of the Audubon Society, I ignored this; I made the mistake of referring to proposed solar thermal sites as “desert wastelands,” and Brian broke in: “They’re deserts, but they’re not wastelands,” he pointed out. Good point; I stand corrected.

I nevertheless contend that paying a certain well-defined ecological price for turning off fossil fuel and nuclear plants is a deal that we simply must make without shame or compunction. If we’re speeding the extinction of a rare desert lizard in the process of reverting the rise of greenhouse gasses and the terrible consequences to every species on earth that are very probably tied to this phenomenon, it strikes me as the bargain of the century. 

I’m not sure how anyone could object to this.  The only proviso here, I would think, would be that that such decisions be made on a fair and measured basis.  We need to study the issue carefully and pull the trigger only when we’re sure we’re doing the least possble damage.

Related posts:

I spoke with Brian because I wanted to get a sense for one of renewable energy’s most ironic truths:  renewables (in this case, wind energy) can run afoul of environmentalists. This subject will occupy an entire chapter of the book, but I’d like to try to abbreviate this interview into a few sentences.

In essence, I’ve come to understand from Brian and others that that there is very little similarity between what well-intentioned people would do to alleviate the energy crisis and what is actually happening in the real world — and sadly, this extends into renewables as well as oil, gas and coal. Big private money and big public power have come together to make an insane asylum out of the US energy policy.

The Energy Act of 2005 gave the Bush administration the power to ignore the reports of the nation’s most senior biologists and order drilling wherever it wished. More recently, the stimulus packages calls for those awarded grants to begin work more-less immediately, leaving no time for deliberation that would protect endangered species from the concrete and steel that are fragmenting and otherwise ruining their habitat. Instead of studying the problem and developing solutions that are in everyone’s best interests, the government is rushing to throw money at renewable energy solutions as fast as it can print it, and making a huge mess in the process.

Wyoming is highly prized for its windy plains, but wind power companies are not forced to follow the same Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) guidelines as the fossil fuel people, and can thus do essentially as they please.

“I’m a big proponent of renewable energy, but it’s like anything else: it can be done thoughtfully and deliberately, or it can be rushed and done wrong.  Unformately, what’s happened here in Wyoming is the latter,” Brian laments.  He seems like a tough but sophisticated cowboy — one who understands the true issues and is willing to fight hard for what he believes; I can hear the tenacity in his voice.  But he knows this won’t be easy.  “These wind people are like the gas people — on steroids,” he tells me.

“Are they really worse, or is it just that you were expecting better?” I queried.

“Maybe it’s that,” Brain allowed. “I guess I was expecting better.”

Related posts:

A current project, for instance – one that will require decades to complete, is the rebuilding of the wetlands around New Orleans – and then working all the way north up the Mississippi River to its source.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of our conversation dealt with the delicate issue of the environmental impact of renewable energy plants. Of course, this is highly ironic, considering the incalculable damage that the mining and consumption of fossil fuels have wreaked. It really is paradoxical to consider that efforts to stop poisoning our skies and oceans sometimes meet resistance from environmentalists.

Yet there truly are important issues to be considered. Take, for instance, the location of wind farms in northern Wyoming. It is true that Wyoming has already been badly damaged by oil and gas exploration and that establishing wind farms and the power lines necessary to transport the electricity will do even more harm to the sage grasslands where the animals in Yellowstone spend their winters. And it’s true that there are areas in which the human footprint is already much larger in which these wind farms would do less ecological damage.

But surely we need flexibility.  I pointed out the obvious:  “If we all dig our heels in about making zero impact with our solar thermal and wind farms, we’re playing right into the hands of big coal and oil.” Well, I’m happy to report that Audubon agrees. I ask readers to go through some of the really thoughtful articles and position statements on their website.  I was gratified to see that the people at Audubon speak the language of compromise.

And let me point out that they do more than talk: they study. Using Google Earth, they’ve focused intense amounts of research on the subject, and offer maps where wind farms are most recommended.

Folks, on behalf of all the animals – on land and in the air — whose habitat you help protect — thank you.

Related posts: