Articles filed under Impact on Landscape
A “frac-out” from a drilling line late last week has resulted in a prolonged cleanup in Cherry Creek.
Environmentalists, commercial fishermen, recreational boaters, labor unions, homeowners, boardwalk businesses, NIMBYs and ratepayer advocates are all circling Orsted, the Dutch wind power company behind what could be one of the largest wind farms in North America. Local, state and federal officials are also starting to feel the heat. Just about everyone involved, including David Hardy, CEO of Orsted US, worries the project could devolve into chaos.
'I am very green but these schemes are not green at all,' says Heather. 'They are all about money. 'Aside from looking at those hideous panels, our lives will be dominated by acres of metal, glass, CCTV and generator boxes. ...' Across Britain, solar farms are on the march. Some 1,000 acres of rural land a month are earmarked for 'photovoltaic' panels and the miles of cabling that go with them.
It was a huge moment in the fight against climate change. The Biden administration announced this week that it would open more than 250,000 acres of ocean water off California’s Central Coast to wind energy development.
Do “greens” think we can’t see that huge quantities of raw materials and fossil fuels are used to mine, manufacture, transport and construct these intermittent, unreliable, grid crashing environmentally destructive scams? Hydro, and nuclear power have a small footprint and a small impact on the environment compared to the waste of “renewables.”
A Sutherland resident is urging her neighbours not to accept “the tainted silver coin” when it comes to a proposed windfarm on Loch Shin.
Our president is afraid of being set on fire by the Greens if he withdraws his support for wind projects. Environmentalists are screaming very loudly, if we abandon these projects they will scream even louder! But now, they are influential, they can turn the political landscape upside down.
A recent article discussing environmental concerns about renewable energy (”Locals worry wind and solar will gobble up forests and farms,” April 30) highlighted the central issue around achieving carbon emission goals — the balance between reducing carbon emissions and preserving carbon sinks. While it is true that large ground-mounted projects are cheaper than smaller solar projects on rooftops and previously developed sites, there is more to the story.
But residents who love rural Washington’s bright open spaces deserve better than a “get used to it” scolding as their landscape changes. The transitions to channel sunshine and canyon winds into the power grid must be managed with sensitivity. The shift to cleaner energy is too essential to lose progress to a deepening cultural clash.
Some state regulators have begun rethinking their wind and solar strategies to push projects away from undeveloped areas. But they acknowledge more conflicts are inevitable as the industry grows, and many states still lack a clear picture of the land use that will be required to meet their renewable energy goals. In Massachusetts, 150,000 acres could be lost to renewable energy development as the state seeks to meet its climate targets, according to a 2020 report from Mass Audubon, a conservation nonprofit. Between 2012 and 2017, the group found that solar projects accounted for a quarter of the natural lands that were converted to development. In response to those concerns, Massachusetts leaders are seeking to reduce state incentives for building solar projects on ecologically sensitive lands.
In official comments to the US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) submitted July 30, 2018, New York suggested the wind turbines be no closer than 20 miles from shore. This recommendation was based upon an earlier study by BOEM that concluded that 600-foot-high turbines produced a “dominate impact “on the beach view 15 miles offshore. Adjusting for the new 50% taller turbines, the suggested distance from the shore should be 30 miles. In Europe, the closest lease area for these jumbo turbines is 44 miles out. The New York decision begs the question of why lease areas from Maryland to Massachusetts aren’t being rejected on the same merits.
In Colombia, projects on Indigenous lands need the informed consent of the affected communities. But according to activists, leaders, and researchers who work in the region, the consultations to approve the projects are being rushed and are not providing the information communities need to make decisions. Silva Duarte and Barney have found that in most cases, companies arrived in rancherías under the pretext of installing wind-measuring towers, explaining that a bigger project might follow. Silva Duarte says companies offer anything from food to school supplies to sewing materials (woven bags are an important income source for Wayúu women) in exchange for signatures that prove that people had been consulted.
Opponents have gained the most traction in rural neighborhoods, like the one west of Goldendale near the Hansons’ property, where some large farms have been subdivided into smaller tracts of land, attracting an influx of retirees and others who don’t want to see nearby landscapes transformed by solar panels. Fierce debates over solar siting also have erupted in other areas of the country, stretching from Virginia to Indiana to California.
During the protest, Cape May County Commissioner Director Gerald Thornton came out to speak to the attendees. He told them that he was opposed to the wind farm and that he, along with his fellow Commissioners who stood outside with him, would approve a resolution at Tuesday’s meeting opposing wind farms. The resolution was unanimously approved.
But in Ocean City and other popular destinations, the threat of climate change is at odds with a perceived threat to tourism. Increasingly vocal opposition is being raised against the construction of offshore wind farms, as shore property owners worry that turbines on the horizon will spoil the views from the beach and discourage tourists from visiting in the summer.
Decision time for a controversial wind-turbine project proposed in eastern Shasta County could come later this spring. But where the public hearing before the Shasta County Planning Commission will be and how many people will be permitted to attend, if it’s an in-person meeting, has not been determined.
A land battle is brewing at the site of what could be Nevada's newest national monument, Avi Kwa Ame.
Picture an area of land equal to the combined territories of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island — 228,000 square miles in all. That's the space that could be required to site most of the massive deployments of wind and solar generation required to fulfill President Biden's goal of a net-zero-carbon economy by midcentury, according to a recent first-ever project to attempt mapping that future.
In Ocean City, members of the community and elected officials are raising objections to Danish energy company Orsted’s plans for a wind farm 15 miles off the South Jersey coast from Atlantic City to Cape May. Also, elected officials and representatives of the fishing industry in Long Beach Island are voicing similar concerns over another wind farm proposed by Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind about 10 miles off Barnegat Light.
Wind farms are not environmentally friendly to land or to nature. For example, the excavation of leased land to install and support wind farms permanently alters that property’s landscapes, rock outcroppings and micro-environments – all of which are irreplaceable. ...The turbines are a blight for miles around, and they also interfere with endangered species. Current projects in Montague and Jack counties will negatively affect the migration paths and lay-over locations of Whooping Cranes. Current population numbers are estimated to be about 500 Whopping Cranes left.