Nestled between Joshua Tree National Park and The Mojave National Preserve, just off the nostalgic Route 66, lies a battlefield in the fight between renewable energy advocates and environmentalists. In a battle that has been waged since 2001, utility companies have proposed to build a utility corridor that would connect southern California with the Ivanpah Valley, which contains some of the highest solar potential in the United States.
Environmental groups such as the Wildlands Conservancy, the Protect Our Communities Foundation, and the Sierra Club have appealed the decision place solar and wind projects in thousands of acres of desert land. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) is preparing legislation that would designate this territory as a national monument, closing off the area for exploration.
Since the Obama administration is pushing for a $150 billion investment in clean energy such as wind and solar to create new jobs, this fight in the desert is placing usual allies against each other.
At a speech to the Energy Department at the beginning of February, the President promised a better and smarter grid that would "ship wind and solar power from one end of this country to the other."
“Deserts don’t need to be sacrificed so that people in L.A. can keep heating their swimming pools,” Terry Frewin, a local Sierra Club representative said in a New York Times article. Many environmentalists are also concerned with the fate of an endangered breed of tortoises who make the area their home.
As noted in many articles and our own David Scholnick, a smart grid is necessary to transport energy areas rich with wind and solar to communities across America. Many of our contributors have submitted videos that deal with the promise of wind and solar. Very few, however, deal with how we transport that energy.
It is a rift that has existed in environmentalism since the early 20th century. For some environmentalists, the preservation of wilderness and pristine areas becomes paramount over any potential energy project that may reduce CO2. Called preservationists, they argue for the protection of landscapes and wildlife species through elimination of human impact. Notable preservationists range from Aldo Leopold to John Muir. Conservationists, in the other camp, want to maintain a balance environmental quality and resources. Gilford Pichot and President Teddy Roosevelt began this movement by advocating responsibly when extracting resources from pristine forests and landscapes.
This internal conflict within environmentalism has also been shown on the shores of Nantucket Sound, where the Cape Wind project has proposed to put windmills to generate renewable electricity for Cape Cod, MA. As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a 2005 New York Times op-ed, “I support wind power, including wind power on the high seas…but I do believe that some places should be off limits to any sort of industrial development. I wouldn't build a wind farm in Yosemite National Park. Nor would I build one on Nantucket Sound, which is exactly what the company Energy Management is trying to do with its Cape Wind project.”
Cape Wind and Mojave Desert are just two of many battles yet to come in the next few years between those who value pristine landscapes versus those who advocate for clean energy.
5 comments for "Sacrificing Our Pristine Landscapes for Clean Energy?".
1. Not In My Backyard
I also agree that we don't need to create large alternative energy plants in order to support wayward consumerism. However, I would like to see large wind farms developed, rather than hydroelectric dams, or nuclear power plants.
I only have about forty square feet of back yard at my tiny riverside house in Maine. And even though they would interfere with my view somewhat, I'd love to put in a few smaller sized wind generators that I've seen recently. Heck, if they work on sailboats, why not my house. Also, there are solar roofing tiles out there (developed about ten years ago now) - and if I could afford them, I'd tile my roof with them in an instant.
I grew up on Cape Cod and on those waters, and I understand JFK Jrs. concern about Not in His Backyard. However, I believe the proposed site would be far enough off shore that to the naked eye, the farm would look comparable to a thick fleet of boats. We have telephone poles and wires strung all over our pristine wildernesses, and yet there are no complaints about those . . . there are no protests about the large electic plant in Sandwich on the Cape Cod Canal . . . surely disrupting someone's idea of a pristine view. I'm willing to sacrifice a bit of my personal view for good clean alternative energy!
Government needs to subsidize costs of alternative energies so the average home owner or small business can get to work creating their own.
PS Planet Forward is more of what we need more of . . . thanks!
2. "Our Way of Life is Not Negotiable"
"Deserts don't need to be sacrificed so that people in L.A. can keep heating their swimming pools,"
This is the crux of the matter right here.
We water lawns in the desert, we overheat buildings in the wintertime and overcool them in the summertime. We use leaf blowers instead of garden rakes, dry clothes by machine instead of line drying, and drive trillions of miles a year in vehicles with only one occupant. We transport the foods we eat thousands of miles from farm to dinner plate, kill the earth with pesticides and then use artifical fertilizers to make things grow, we overbuild our living space to occupy ever-more land with sprawl, and ship millions of plastic items with a useful life of only a few weeks thousands of miles from producer to purchaser, only to end up tossing them into a landfill.
I think we have to find the cure for this behaviour before we concrete over more wild lands to support our energy habit.
3. I DO NOT AGREE
The underlying premise of your arguments is that these places, currently 'pristine' would remain so if they went undeveloped.
The inherent difficulty of distributed generation is that it requires more time to realize projects. Developing projects in already developed areas is more difficult than developing in remote areas that still have access to transmission lines.
The pace of installations is far to slow and complaining about costs is silly and ignorant.
Only remaining is the lack of will to realize this future. Once these areas are developed they will be fit to be called 'pristine.'
4. Distributed generation
We already have all the space needed for most alt energy on our roofs, yards and parking lots. No real need to mess up virgin land in most cases. While a few things like geothermal, tidal/river power, ect may need special placements, wind and solar can be used in many areas that are where the power is used.
The real reason for most such big solar, wind farms in deserts, ect is so utilities, other big business can try to monopolize energy.
With simple conservation/eff improvements we can need 50% less energy is the best starting point, then home, small business who pay the most for energy should be the ones making it as they can profit the most.
Alt energy is spread out so not an Utility friendly power source and why they fight it. But it's perfect for small producers and they should be the ones getting help, education.
All we need is the cost effective equipment in real mass production which can be done at lower costs, $4k/kw, than new coal, nuke costs, not even including their fuel cost.
We don't need more research, we need orders, production of windgens, solar thermal generators and insulating home shells to retrofit older homes.
EV batteries that give 200 mile range are already here and have been for 2 yrs but they have not had orders to ramp up production because car companies won't build EV's. We had 100 mile range EV's in 1911 some that still use their original batteries, NiFE!
Even lead batteries can give 100 mile cost effective range if designed for it. I as many drive EV's every day but to get ours we had to build or convert our own!!
A fairly good battery, NiMH patent were bought by Chevron stopping the RAV4EV production and stopping others from being started. Those sold for $45k now at 7-10 yrs old sell for $75k!!
None of these need new tech, just production, orders. Gov start up loans and equipment designs along with customer loans will make this happen fast. For about $8k/1000sq' of eff home buys the equipment to make solar/ wind power for it's lifetime!!
Let's do this because otherwise energy costs will soar if not. Alt energy done right is the low cost energy.
By putting the full cost, subsidies in oil, coal with a 'carbon tax' instead of our income taxes, health care costs, ect will speed this up and keep $1T/yr here making jobs or it will go to Iran, Russia, oil dictators and terrorists. So Alt energy is also patriotic!!
5. This debate should not even exist!
There's no reason to chop down the rain forest to create a so-called "solar farm." Our government needs to bring the price of the new high capacity flexible solar panels down through subsidies, grants, and tax incentives so that we can practically pave the roads with them. When the price is right, we will wall paper the outside of our houses with them, and we won't need the ridiculous infrastructure tearing through our national parks, because last time I checked, the same sun shined on my house that shines where they want to put the farms:)