In The Fight Against AGW, There Are Always Consequences

Simply shocking that there would be consequences, eh?

More forests, deserts and grasslands in the U.S. will be used to produce energy under a proposal to cap greenhouse gases, an unintended consequence of efforts to fight global warming, according to a Nature Conservancy report.

A bill that boosts energy from wind turbines and biofuels will increase the amount of land needed for energy development as much as 48 percent, or almost 100,000 square kilometers (38,600 square miles) during the next 20 years, said Robert McDonald, a scientist with the Arlington, Virginia-based Nature Conservancy environmental group. An area larger than Minnesota will be affected even without any climate change bill, he said.

Wait, a “green” organization is saying this? Whoah! Did something just freeze over?

In reality, they are correct, and this has actually been a concern for many groups, particularly those who care about the environment, and aren’t linking ever little thing to AGW. It takes quite a bit of clear cut land to build solar receptor farms. To light up San Diego, it takes 5 square miles of desert. Of course, they still need a nuclear or coal plant fully on-line for when it is dark or cloud covered. Wind farms will take up large amounts of space, too. This means less trees, which are heavily controlled in Waxman-Markey.

The problem with Democrats in government is that intentions and actions are what count, not results and consequences. They want pie in the sky energy, but, they do not consider what will actually happen, because their intentions are “pure.” Yes, we need to consider other options. Personally, I would like to see more research into making small home solar and wind units considerably better at capturing energy, rather than large area plants. There are certainly areas where large solar and wind farms could be created, but, interestingly, it is often the same environmentalists and Democrats who block these projects. A certain Senator who shall remain nameless was primary in blocking the Cape Wind Project. It interfered with his boating.

I wish I could find the two links again, but, even on ye olde Interwebz, some things can be hard to find. First, there is a solar project outside Los Angeles that was blocked because environmentalists sued over the transmission line. Second, there was a paper I read a few years ago about the potential for large amounts of solar panels to cause serious problems to the earth, because the solar light was not reaching the ground in sufficient quantity, and because not enough light was being reflected back into the atmosphere, light needed to make sure the greenhouse effect continues and keeps the Earth warm enough for life.

And then there is the land needed to grow corn, used to create ethanol which is virtually worthless when compared to gasoline. Oh, and it requires huge amounts of water to create. Oh, oh, and then there is the fact that it is worse that gas when it comes to CO2 output. But, hey, intentions over consequences.

Meanwhile, Senator Mary Landrieu is against cap and trade.

CO2 causes global cooling. Wait, what?

A climahysteric soft prOn site? Yup. Anthony Watts has the details.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend