I’m sure that you’re not all tree-huggers like I am, but we all agree on the basics: global warming is a scam, the modern environmentalist movement is a political movement, “justice” means the erasure of any and all basic American principles, and…anything the government subsidizes ought to be examined with extreme scrutiny.
This is basically a ping, retweet, response, or +1 to Vladimir’s post “Big Bird Learns It’s Not Easy Being Green” which features a video of a vulture colliding with an electricity-generating windmill. The lesson is that these things are far from green.
Public acceptance of proven energy sources (coal, oil, nuclear) is being replaced by this calamitous stumble-all-over-yourself “green energy” movement. And “green energy” has come to trump biodiversity, conservation, and spatial ecology (not to mention common sense). Brazil, for example, is praised for its non-dependence on oil, even if that means that it’s clearing its forests at a rate I won’t even begin to describe, to grow fuel–and that’s just the start of it.
Rooftop solar panels offer promising technology, but large-scale reflector plants almost always wind up in the most sensitive wildlife habitats, contributing piddly amounts of energy to ‘the grid’ at a whacked-out, way out of proportion cost-benefit ratio. Windmills require vast amounts of cleared land to twirl (on the good days, in the good seasons), and are responsible for countless bird and bat deaths, often affecting the larger and more endangered species. The Cretan vulture in Vladimir’s post is one perfect example.
‘Super clever’ ideas like wave-powered electricity (ocean waves, that is) would be abhorrently destructive of marine wildlife, obstructing migration routes and marine mammal communication–and that’s the least of it. You want sterile, shark free coasts? Wave harvesters might just be your technology.
And did I mention biofuels? Ethanol, anyone? It’s shaping up to be a bigger disaster than the cash crop system, and if we continue on this 10% business, or God forbid, make it twenty, forests will fall and food prices will rise into the prohibitively expensive zone, particularly for those living on “less than $1 a day.”
The point is that “green fuels” are anything but, at best responsible for negligible emissions reduction from automobile tailpipes. Windmills are horribly destructive to wildlife and wild places, already responsible (in their mission to achieve .25% of total electricity production in the United States) for permanently stripping mountainsides to create the open space, roads, and infrastructure required to maintain them and transport their energy. Solar farms have much the same record.
It’s inconceivable that many of these environmental groups that are (rightfully) standing up against a lot of these permanently and continuously destructive projects are clamoring so for that day, a hundred years from now, when a few less puffs of steam might expire from the smokestacks of a coal plant, that they’re still willing to favor and push for the giant, sharp-edged noisemakers, open-air incinerators, and submarine meat grinders.
Sorry, RedState. I’m a greenie. I believe God created the earth and all its species, big, small, and microscopic, and that moderation and careful and conscious use of resources and space is virtuous and right. And I believe that biodiversity is a worthy end goal, not just a(n unlikely) potential side effect if 7 billion humans manage to “come together” to “defeat climate change.”
So we might diverge a bit on the ends, but let’s at least come together to decry the means. The United States, for at least a century, has had the best environmental record in the world. Let’s keep it that way. [Check out 20/10, my, blog.]