Renewable Energy Is Killing the Environment

 

IVANPAH_solar_plant_green_builderA lot has been made of California’s government-funded embrace of so-called green energy. Driving from the Arizona border to LA, you’ll be hypnotized by hundreds of whirring windmills littering Coachella Valley and distracted by the blindingly bright light generated by vast new solar arrays.

A bit north in the Mojave Desert lies the $2.2 billion Ivanpah Solar Power Facility, wedged into the public land between the Mojave National Preserve, Mesquite Wilderness, and Stateline Wilderness. In its first year, it produced just 40 percent of the promised energy, greatly improved in its second year, then was knocked offline after a misalignment of solar panels caused the central collector to burst into flames.

But it’s not just expensive equipment getting fried. Birds mistake the panels’ reflection for water, fly a bit too low, and they burst into flames as well. And the site takes up so much land that the delicate desert ecosystem suffers, blading away plants and kicking tortoises and other critters out of their habitat.

These effects are making several honest environmentalists change their tune on the building of new solar power facilities. Jacques Leslie, an environmental journalist “concerned about the immense environmental and social consequences of humanity’s heedless, headlong embrace of development,” is raising alarms about a proposed plant in the Mojave:

To learn what most endangers national parks, on the occasion this month of the National Park Service’s 100th birthday, look no farther than Mojave National Preserve, a vast swath of exquisite desert panoramas halfway between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. These days, national parks struggle with all sorts of urgent threats, such as climate change and deteriorating services and infrastructure as a result of underfunding, but Mojave’s biggest menace isn’t what’s happening inside the preserve, it’s what increasingly surrounds it.

Three industrial-scale solar farms adjacent to the preserve are already in operation, the Interior Department has approved a fourth, and a wind farm proposal is getting serious consideration. One of the solar farms, Ivanpah, made news recently for frying birds and setting itself on fire.

Soda Mountain, the solar project approved for construction on Bureau of Land Management land next to the Mojave preserve, would be the largest industrial site within 100 miles. It would isolate and possibly doom a portion of the desert’s depleted population of bighorn sheep, and like the other energy projects, it would be visible from the preserve. By generating enough renewable electricity for 86,000 homes, the project would address one environmental problem, climate change, while creating others: It would show that an energy project can be renewable without being green.

I’m not against solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources in the slightest; the more options, the better. But environmentalists like Leslie are learning the hard truth taught by Thomas Sowell: “There are no solutions; there are only trade-offs.” Oil is cheap and plentiful, but creates significant pollution. Hydroelectric doesn’t create pollution, but should we be stopping up rivers and creating inland seas like Lake Mead? Nuclear is effective and releases only steam, but what do you do with the waste?

Despite being sold as a cure-all by politicians, these trade-offs also exist with renewable energy sources. Windmills are inefficient, they Cuisinart birds, and barely break even economically due to high maintenance costs. Solar arrays are similarly inefficient, require extensive mining to build panels, take up massive amounts of land, and ignite anything that flies into their path.

But since environmentally conscious voters don’t see belching smokestacks, they assume trade-offs don’t exist. There are no magic energy sources that will heal the planet. There are only trade-offs.

Published in Environment
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 37 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Three months ago, Senator Lamar Alexander spoke about a proposed wind farm near Crab Orchard, Tennessee.  He posed ten questions with answers:

    1.  How big are these wind turbines?  Each one is over two times as tall as the skyboxes at the University of Tennessee football stadium, three times as tall as Ozone Falls and taller than the Statute of Liberty.   The blades on each one are as long as a football field. Their blinking lights can be seen for twenty miles. These are not your grandma’s windmills.

    2.  Will they disturb the neighborhood?   Here is what a New York Times review of the documentary “Windfall,” said about New York residents debating such turbines:  “Turbines are huge…with blades weighing seven tons and spinning at 150 miles an hour. They can fall over or send parts flying; struck by lightning, say, they can catch fire…and can generate a disorienting strobe effect in sunlight. Giant flickering shadows can tarnish a sunset’s glow on a landscape.”

    3.  How much electricity can the project produce?  A puny amount, 71 megawatts. But, that’s only when the wind is blowing, which in Tennessee is only 18.4 % of the time according to the Energy Information Administration.

    4.  Does TVA need this electricity?  No. Last year, TVA said there is “no immediate need for new base load plants after Watts Bar Unit 2 comes online,” and just last week TVA put up for sale its unfinished Bellefonte nuclear plant.

    • #31
  2. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    5.  Don’t we need wind power’s carbon-free electricity to help with climate change?   No. Nuclear power is a more reliable option. Nuclear produces over 60% of our country’s carbon free electricity which is available 92% of the time.  Wind produces 15% of our country’s carbon-free electricity, but the wind often blows at night when electricity is not needed.

    6.  How many wind turbines would it take to equal one nuclear reactor?  To equal the production of the new Watts Bar reactor, you would have to run three rows of these turbines along I-40 from Memphis to Knoxville—and don’t forget the transmission lines. Four reactors—each occupying roughly one square mile—would equal the production of a row of 45-story wind turbines strung the entire length of the 2,178-mile Appalachian Trail from Georgia to Maine.  Relying on wind power to produce electricity when nuclear reactors are available is the energy equivalent of going to war in sailboats when the nuclear navy is available.

    7.  Can you easily store large amounts of wind power and use it later when you need it?  No.

    8.  So even if you build wind turbines, do you still need nuclear, coal or gas plants for the 80% of the time when the wind isn’t blowing in Tennessee?   Yes.

    • #32
  3. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    9.  Then, why would anyone want to build wind power that TVA doesn’t need?   Because billions of dollars of wasteful federal taxpayer subsidies allow wind producers, in some markets, to give away wind power and still make a profit.

    10.  Who is going  to guarantee that these giant wind turbines get taken down when they wear out in 20 years and after the subsidies go away?  Good question.

    You can see the rest of Senator Alexander’s remarks here:

    http://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=15422DB3-BE86-4228-B026-F88B12CF5C17

    • #33
  4. CandE Inactive
    CandE
    @CandE

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: Oil is cheap and plentiful, but creates significant pollution.

    This is becoming less and less true.  While it is true that oil contains many toxic pollutants, refineries are extremely well equipped to remove and control those compounds so they never get emitted into the environment.  By 2020, gasoline specs will require <10 ppm sulfur and diesel is already at <15 ppm sulfur.  99.9% of all the sulfur in oil will be removed and sold to chemical plants.  Any metals end up on catalyst (which can be recycled into construction materials), coke (which can be burned in clean coal plants where the metals are removed), or slurry oils (which can be used in many non-polluting industrial applications like carbon black).

    Oil production has also gotten much cleaner.  Yes, there are spills, even big ones like BP in the gulf coast, but the total amount of oil spilled is lower every year.  Part of that is due to improvements in traditional methods, and part is due to the increased use of new methods (like fracking or horizontal drilling) that are simply less likely to spill.

    -E

    • #34
  5. Randal H Member
    Randal H
    @RandalH

    MJBubba: 3. How much electricity can the project produce? A puny amount, 71 megawatts. But, that’s only when the wind is blowing, which in Tennessee is only 18.4 % of the time according to the Energy Information Administration.

    I discovered this a few years back when I took a sailing class at a local marina. I live in the Tennessee Valley, and they told us that our area is the lowest-wind area in the entire country in the summer (when electricity demand is at its highest). Their joke was that sailing involves stocking the boat with beer, catching a puff of wind until it dies, drinking beer until the next puff, repeat.

    Anyone who lives here knows that this is because of a large temperature inversion that traps hot, humid, stale, air in the valley. It leaves you praying for even the slightest breeze.

    • #35
  6. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Randal H:

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: Nuclear is effective and releases only steam, but what do you do with the waste?

    You reprocess and reuse it. Spent fuel rods contain over 90% of their original energy value. Our nuclear waste policy in this country is beyond idiotic.

    Give it to the Post Office. What it doesn’t lose, it will destroy.

    • #36
  7. Hartmann von Aue Member
    Hartmann von Aue
    @HartmannvonAue

    Johnny Dubya:There’s a war on “distracted driving”. You better not even glance at Google Maps on your smartphone!

    Meanwhile, we’ll set up these giant, whirling blades right next to the highway. That won’t be distracting at all.

    And they won’t trigger any seizures in children with seizure disorders, either. Just ask my niece and her husband…..

    • #37
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.