<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for GOP: Solar powered jobs can go to hell (or at least limbo)]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by jimandre http://www.grist.org/article/gop-solar-powered-jobs-can-go-to-hell-or-at-least-limbo/ Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:08:02 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/gop-solar-powered-jobs-can-go-to-hell-or-at-least-limbo/1 Missing from this story, and not discussed by the NGOs (who, like the solar industry are in love only with the word "green"), is that solar development in the SW deserts, as fast-tracked by Obama and Salazar, is anything but GREEN, it's GREED. More than 50% of the native plant species in the U.S. occur in the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts.  Today permits are out to bulldoze more than 4 million acres of pristine desert landscape including more than 40 projects placed right up to National Park boundaries.  Industrialization of our last remaining wildlands as a first alternative, when rooftops, parking lots, degraded ag. lands are viable and often cheaper alternatives shows a disdain for the values of our American natural heritage, and ownership each of us has in our public lands system. Thermal solar plants use tremendous amounts of water and fossil fuels to run. Green? Photovoltaics solar and wind power should be pursued and ASAP, but to devastate the desert southwest, one of the last large viable ecosystems in the world as a first option? This is more than bad planning, it is insanity. We must educate, if not embarrass Obama the Sierra Club, for they apparently know not what they do.

]]> Missing from this story, and not discussed by the NGOs (who, like the solar industry are in love only with the word "green"), is that solar development in the SW deserts, as fast-tracked by Obama and Salazar, is anything but GREEN, it's GREED. More than 50% of the native plant species in the U.S. occur in the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts.  Today permits are out to bulldoze more than 4 million acres of pristine desert landscape including more than 40 projects placed right up to National Park boundaries.  Industrialization of our last remaining wildlands as a first alternative, when rooftops, parking lots, degraded ag. lands are viable and often cheaper alternatives shows a disdain for the values of our American natural heritage, and ownership each of us has in our public lands system. Thermal solar plants use tremendous amounts of water and fossil fuels to run. Green? Photovoltaics solar and wind power should be pursued and ASAP, but to devastate the desert southwest, one of the last large viable ecosystems in the world as a first option? This is more than bad planning, it is insanity. We must educate, if not embarrass Obama the Sierra Club, for they apparently know not what they do.

]]> Comment #2 by Osha Gray Davidson http://www.grist.org/article/gop-solar-powered-jobs-can-go-to-hell-or-at-least-limbo/ Mon, 06 Jul 2009 15:05:19 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/gop-solar-powered-jobs-can-go-to-hell-or-at-least-limbo/2 The problem of using desert wildlands for solar power isn't discussed in this piece because the bill I was writing about offers incentives to businesses that make equipment for renewable energy production -- not for producers of that energy themselves. No wildlands are involved, so that issue isn't mentioned.

That said, you raise a good point. I recently wrote about it here and here.

As you'll see, I, too, am leery of mega-scale solar farms. But they can be sited on already distrurbed lands, particularly on former irrigated farms. Solar farms can also be sited next to existing transmission lines. But WILL they be built sustainably and with a minimized footprint? That's where we come in (all of us). It''s the job of journalists to keep people informed about how the plans are moving forward, and it's the job of an informed citizenry to act on that information and keep the process honest, real, safe and clean.

I don't know about the national Sierra Club, but our local Arizona Grand Canyon Chapter is keeping a close eye on the BLM to make sure the process is done right.

Thanks for raising a vital issue. There's a debate among environmentalists about whether rooftop PV can supply enough electricity to switch from coal and other dirty sources. From what I've seen, I don't think that'll work, and certainly not in time to lower GHG emmissions enough to head off a lot of damage from global warming. I think we need both concentrated solar power and distributed SP.

]]> The problem of using desert wildlands for solar power isn't discussed in this piece because the bill I was writing about offers incentives to businesses that make equipment for renewable energy production -- not for producers of that energy themselves. No wildlands are involved, so that issue isn't mentioned.

That said, you raise a good point. I recently wrote about it here and here.

As you'll see, I, too, am leery of mega-scale solar farms. But they can be sited on already distrurbed lands, particularly on former irrigated farms. Solar farms can also be sited next to existing transmission lines. But WILL they be built sustainably and with a minimized footprint? That's where we come in (all of us). It''s the job of journalists to keep people informed about how the plans are moving forward, and it's the job of an informed citizenry to act on that information and keep the process honest, real, safe and clean.

I don't know about the national Sierra Club, but our local Arizona Grand Canyon Chapter is keeping a close eye on the BLM to make sure the process is done right.

Thanks for raising a vital issue. There's a debate among environmentalists about whether rooftop PV can supply enough electricity to switch from coal and other dirty sources. From what I've seen, I don't think that'll work, and certainly not in time to lower GHG emmissions enough to head off a lot of damage from global warming. I think we need both concentrated solar power and distributed SP.

]]>