Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation in Congress on Monday to protect a million acres of the Mojave Desert in California by scuttling some 13 big solar plants and wind farms planned for the region.
This is just so typical of liberals. They speak of energy independence, etc. and "alternatives" to oil, and then do everything they can to block such things on "envoronmental" concerns.
We will never not need oil. Too much depends on oil. If we are to compete in a "global economy" as they say we should, and maintain our leadership, domestic oil simply must be part of the equation.
Can't you read? The land was donated and has a limited use convenient so ultimately the proposed development would have gotten tossed out by the courts anyway. All Feinstein did was save taxpayers around 20 years of legal fees.
A lot of this land is BLM land, which is legitimately useful for solar/wind power.
These lawsuits don't have to happen. They'll happen ONLY BECAUSE groups funded by Soros et. al. have absolutely nothing else better to do with their money.
Can't you read? The land was donated and has a limited use convenient so ultimately the proposed development would have gotten tossed out by the courts anyway. All Feinstein did was save taxpayers around 20 years of legal fees.
Oh yeah, and another thing...
I'm not going to play along with the environut's "frame the debate" game and just say "well this land was donated and it was going to be in courts so we're just putting the land back to its original natural status".
Bullcr@p. The federal gov't can dictate whatever it wants with BLM land.
The US should not determine energy policy based on the possibility of well funded enviro-idiots filing a lawsuit. It should determine policy based on need and where is the optimum spot to put solar power plants and needed power lines.
Didn't read the article, but I share the OP's perceived sentiment.....
Dems have GOT to pick here..... You can't lament the effect on wildlife or terrain EVERY SINGLE TIME that solar and wind-farms are proposed for certain areas.... We had the same thing in the Valley here..... Proposed wind farm gets shot down because of the way it will effect the appearance of the landscape.....
Can't have it both ways here guys.... If you want alternative energy, it has to be located where it makes SENSE (ie... Solar power in a desert, Wind power on a mountain side, etc...)...
You're trying to use facts to reason with mindless partisan hacks. Truth and reality play absolutely no part in their relentless hate mongering.
No kidding. I returned to this thread and feel like I've jumped into a schoolyard brawl. Lots of name calling. Lots of misplaced anger.
I don't like the NIMBYs either, but I fail to see how NIMBY is a partisan issue. In my area, the NIMBYs are almost exclusively wealthy people who don't want their mountain views distracted by other development. I couldn't tell you if they're Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives. They all seem pretty selfish, however.
Last edited by nvxplorer; 01-02-2010 at 03:12 PM..
I watched the You tube video of the vulture circling the wind turbine. Around and around, ever closer to the whirling blades. You can guess what happened. They are a hazard to raptors and migratory birds so are not suitable for every area they are proposed for.
If the solar power farms do present a serious ecological problem in certain areas than they need to be re thought. Maybe the earth liberation front will have to start smashing mirrors, who knows?
As usual, there's more to the story. Knee-jerk condemnation is uncalled for.
Here's an excerpt conveniently neglected in the rush to condemn the Senator and her PROPOSED legislation.
"For Mrs. Feinstein, creation of the Mojave national monuments would make good on a promise by the government a decade ago to protect desert land donated by an environmental group that had acquired the property from the Catellus Development Corporation. “The Catellus lands were purchased with nearly $45 million in private funds and $18 million in federal funds and donated to the federal government for the purpose of conservation, and that commitment must be upheld. Period,” Mrs. Feinstein said in a statement."
There's a ton of land in CA and NV and UT and NM and AZ and CO that are fully suitable for large scale (aka "utility-scale") solar power plants, both PV cells or Concentrated (liquid salts) Solar plants.
Goldman-Sachs (GS) and other big money players are buying up large tracts of land in the American Southwest expressly for the purposes of cornering the market for viable solar power sites. No one should forget that GS is up to it's eyeballs in all sorts of Wall Street dealings, many of which are at the heart of our current economic mess. IMO, GS is an unholy criminal family.
If people will please READ the link, they'll see that GS and venture capital firms are all over this issue and all over these desert areas, seeking to carve yet another PRIVATE fortune out of OUR lands that are PUBLICLY owned. RFK Jr is on the opposite side of this issue from Feinstein, one DEM opposing another DEM, rather ironic.
IMO, the mystery here is if Senator Feinstein is simply trying to protect scenic areas whose preservation is covered by long-standing promises, or if she's working for or against GS for some reason. There's usually a lot more to the story than a simple headline.
Ummmm I think this is about some turtles and other animals. After 2 years of researching you would think they would have looked in to this
Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation in Congress on Monday to protect a million acres of the Mojave Desert in California by scuttling some 13 big solar plants and wind farms planned for the region.
Actually, your article details efforts to prevent private entities from gaining access to protected public lands to set up for-profit electrical generators.
Now, if these utilities were going to donate that electricity to the public at no cost, maybe a trade could be worked out.
Actually, your article details efforts to prevent private entities from gaining access to protected public lands to set up for-profit electrical generators.
Now, if these utilities were going to donate that electricity to the public at no cost, maybe a trade could be worked out.
Many people of a certain tribe (see, no name calling) says "well we need to invest in green solar and wind energy". OK, fine.
FACT: you cannot put solar/wind plants just anywhere, like coal, nuclear, and gas. You have to put them where the sun shines the most or wind blows the most. California Energy Commission's wind (http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/wind.html - broken link) and solar (http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/solar_potential.html - broken link) energy maps as well as BLM's wind energy potential and solar energy potential maps put the best spot for solar plants in the Mohave desert.
FACT: If you look at the following map, the Wildlands Conservancy (http://www.wildlandsconservancy.org/projects_cal.html - broken link) (TWC) (rich environmentalists) bought just enough Mohave desert land (the checkerboard) to make it impossible to build either solar plants or even power lines from them to Southern California without going through TWC.
If you look at the same map closer, you will realize that most of the Mohave is ALREADY occupied by the MOHAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE, the Death Valley NATIONAL PARK, or various DoD ranges! There's only two or three strips of land from the CA border to LA which could be used by solar/wind farms or required power lines to SoCal. This is the ridiculous irony, most of Mohave IS ALREADY set aside for preservation!
Feinstein just closed off one of those strips of land. This is effectively closing off virtually all potential solar development in southern California. I just don't know how much simpler I can put it. TWC and Feinstein pretty much just shut down all green energy development which could benefit SoCal. Judging by TWC's web site, they could care less if SoCal goes dark, as long as they can get their precious "desert views" preserved.
Last edited by jkbatca; 01-02-2010 at 06:58 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
