HealthyLivingOPSomewhere In, Tennessee USA4,775 posts
From the Wall Street Journal The Sun King
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, thinks he has a partial solution to America's dependence on high-priced foreign oil. But he says liberals and environmentalists are rejecting it.
Mr. Rohrabacher -- who notes 130 pending applications for solar power projects on federal land administered by the Bureau of Land Management -- has introduced a bill to allow the building of such plants without environmental-impact studies. He tells me that though the BLM has lifted a moratorium on new solar projects on public land that it imposed in 2005, applications are still being clogged up in a bureaucratic pipeline and no new permits have been issued to date. "We need solutions on many levels, and freeing up solar power bottlenecks is one of them," he says.
Debbie Cook, Democratic mayor of Huntington Beach and Mr. Rohrabacher's opponent in this fall's election, opposes his bill as an "extreme position." Environmental groups also oppose it, saying large swaths of vegetation could be disrupted because a sizeable solar power facility requires up to two square miles of land. "If not properly scrutinized, the solar plants have the potential to destroy wildlife habitat, affect water resources, limit outdoor recreation opportunities and prove to be eyesores," is how the Daily Pilot, a local newspaper in Mr. Rohrabacher's Orange County district, summarized the objections of local environmentalists.
Mr. Rohrabacher is amused by the controversy. "Once again the environmental community has demonstrated that they care more about animals than about people," he told me. "I rest my case."
Well, there's an interesting point there about other resources that could be ruined or habitats destroyed just to bring solar powered plants into being. I agree that there should still be some regulating of the building of these plants. However, we must also beware of radicals preventing the building (or delaying it) because of something that is not that important in the long run.
It would be better to convert plants that already exist into greener designs. That way old buildings are recycled, and made greener...no new eyesores, either.
HealthyLivingOPSomewhere In, Tennessee USA4,775 posts
druidess6308: Well, there's an interesting point there about other resources that could be ruined or habitats destroyed just to bring solar powered plants into being. I agree that there should still be some regulating of the building of these plants. However, we must also beware of radicals preventing the building (or delaying it) because of something that is not that important in the long run.
It would be better to convert plants that already exist into greener designs. That way old buildings are recycled, and made greener...no new eyesores, either.
OH, for a perfect world.
The extremists are being very idiotic here! Most of the windturbines in California stretch across dessert and smooth mountain terrain. There is nothing else out there. There is no vegetation growing, it is DESERT!!! THere will never be any vegetation growing there.
All of the other places I have seen windturbines going up, are all in areas which are of no use to anyone, out on the windy plains. THeir argument is BUNK!!! Poor little desert rats won't even be effected by this at all.
America has vast amounts of land available, especially out west, to build as many plants as needed.
Daggett, California has a large solar plant. I hauled containers full of the mirrors to them back in 1985. There is nothing there for it to disrupt. Some people are just idiots!
HealthyLivingOPSomewhere In, Tennessee USA4,775 posts
druidess6308: With that, I'll agree! Yes, there is plenty of land that has no other use, and if that's where they want to put them, then I say "let them".
I just don't see any problem with it.
We need to start using other forms of energy so we will not be so dependant on oil.
What's wrong with these people who oppose it? Geeze!!!
There is nothing else out there. There is no vegetation growing, it is DESERT!!! THere will never be any vegetation growing there.
even the desert has vegetation. That is why they are called desert plants.
There are some that are endangered. Don't know which ones off hand but in the interest of having things on the planet for future generations, it is best to carefully look into new technology and environment compatibility..
Poor little desert rats won't even be effected by this at all.
That kind of reasoning is why, we have problems in the world. I grew up under High Tension Lines. They have since found that those of us who in such environments, were damaged by the EMF's (Electro Magnetic Field's) created by the lines. (They thought it was safe and they did not know back then these problems would happen)
There are high incidents of miscarriage, rare cancers, auto immune diseases, and species of animals and insects have been harmed or died out. This is why it is so dangerous to assume or rush to put something in with out carefully looking at it from all angles.
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
The Sun King
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, thinks he has a partial solution to America's dependence on high-priced foreign oil. But he says liberals and environmentalists are rejecting it.
Mr. Rohrabacher -- who notes 130 pending applications for solar power projects on federal land administered by the Bureau of Land Management -- has introduced a bill to allow the building of such plants without environmental-impact studies. He tells me that though the BLM has lifted a moratorium on new solar projects on public land that it imposed in 2005, applications are still being clogged up in a bureaucratic pipeline and no new permits have been issued to date. "We need solutions on many levels, and freeing up solar power bottlenecks is one of them," he says.
Debbie Cook, Democratic mayor of Huntington Beach and Mr. Rohrabacher's opponent in this fall's election, opposes his bill as an "extreme position." Environmental groups also oppose it, saying large swaths of vegetation could be disrupted because a sizeable solar power facility requires up to two square miles of land. "If not properly scrutinized, the solar plants have the potential to destroy wildlife habitat, affect water resources, limit outdoor recreation opportunities and prove to be eyesores," is how the Daily Pilot, a local newspaper in Mr. Rohrabacher's Orange County district, summarized the objections of local environmentalists.
Mr. Rohrabacher is amused by the controversy. "Once again the environmental community has demonstrated that they care more about animals than about people," he told me. "I rest my case."
-- John Fund