Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Green and mean: The downside of clean energy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 04:15 PM
Original message
Green and mean: The downside of clean energy
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227041.300-green-and-mean-the-downside-of-clean-energy.html

Green and mean: The downside of clean energy

21 April 2009 by Fred Pearce

YOU can understand the frustration on both sides. Environmentalists worldwide are clamouring for bold action to end the burning of fossil fuels and plug the world into renewables. Politicians throw their weight behind a $14 billion scheme that would replace the equivalent of eight coal-fired power stations with tidal power. What do they get for their pains? Green outrage.

"This massively damaging proposal cannot be justified," said Graham Wynne, chief of the UK's normally staid Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). Friends of the Earth said it was "not the answer". What is going on here? Have greens lost the plot? Has environmentalism been hijacked by big construction companies? Or do we simply have to learn that even environmental energy comes at an environmental cost?

The project causing all the controversy is the Severn barrage on the west coast of Britain, but similar stories are playing out across the world. As greens gradually win the argument for switching to renewable energy, they are finding that they don't always like the look of the new world they are creating.

The problem is one of scale. Bigness is often an issue for greens, many of whom grew up reading one of the movement's key texts: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/aug/27/guardiansocietysupplement">E. F. Schumacher's Small Is Beautiful. They liked biofuel while it was about recycling cooking fat, but not when it became growing millions of hectares of palm oil in former Borneo rainforest. Solar panels on roofs are good, but covering entire deserts with them is another matter. They like small wind turbines and even small wind farms, but get very jumpy as wind power reaches industrial scale.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Tidal power is also a boondoggle.
We all know we have to end our dependence on fossil fuels. But we need solutions that work, not alleged-solutions the enrich corporate interests and don't work.

:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC