By Marita Noon
Sunday, December 15, 2013
“Even green projects have an impact on their surrounding
environment.” Green energy, specifically so-called renewables, has been sold to
the American public as the answer to a host of crimes against the planet. But,
as Lex Berko points out in her post on Motherboard, “even green” has its
downside. Biomass may be “renewable,” but burning it releases CO2. Then, it’s
expensive: “A 100% renewable-energy mix from in-state sources could cost up to
five times more,” reports the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). And, energy from wind
and solar sources kills birds.
Wind turbines chop up bald and golden eagles, and other
endangered species, like a Cuisinart—the taller turbines with longer blades
(which produce more energy, and, therefore, is where the trend is heading) have
a predicted annual ten-fold mortality increase. The authors ofa new study on
bird collision mortality at wind facilities concludes: “Given that we found
evidence for increased bird mortality with increasing height of monopole
turbines along with a move toward increasing turbine size, we argue that
wildlife collision risk should be incorporated with energy efficiency
considerations when evaluating the ‘greenness’ of alternative wind energy
development options.” If the Department of Energy were to meet its 2030 goal of
having 20 percent of the nation’s electricity generated from wind, they
project: “a mean annual mortality estimate of roughly 1.4 million birds.”
Hundreds of acres of photovoltaic solar panels confuse
migratory water birds, such as the “once-critically endangered brown pelican
whose lifestyle involves fishing by diving into open water,” to veer miles out
of their way to dive toward what they perceive are lakes or wetlands—only to
die from “blunt force trauma.” At the largest solar thermal plant in the world,
Ivanpah, owned by Brightsource Energy, the 170,000 reflecting mirrors—designed
to “superheat liquid in boilers”—literally fries feathers. The USA Today
reports that the intense radiation—called solar flux—has singed some birds,
melted feathers, and denatured the protein in their wings as they fly through
the intense heat. Unable to fly, the injured birds drop out of the sky and die.
The federally Endangered Yuma clapper rail, the
dramatic-looking black-crowned night heron, double-crested cormorant,
red-breasted merganser, American coots, warblers, goldfinches, a common raven,
and a barn owl—just to name a few, may get a reprieve from being lured to their
death by solar power plants.
USA Today references a “solar-industrial corridor” along
I-10 in Riverside County, California,
which was to have 80 percent of its 148,000 acres covered
with solar panels or mirrors. However, it reports: “Today, that seems unlikely.
Industry trends are toward smaller solar projects and the U.S. Department of
Energy’s (DOE) loan-guarantee program has ended.” (Remember, last week, I
reported on the crony corruption behind the loan approval process for BrightSource’s
Ivanpah project.) Additionally, Friday, December 13, was unlucky for the solar
industry—but lucky for the birds. Giving official recognition of the threat
solar power tower projects pose to wildlife, The California Energy Commission
announced that it is “likely to deny approval to a major Riverside County solar
power project that has been criticized for posing an unacceptable risk to birds
and other wildlife.”
The bald and golden eagles aren’t so lucky. The Friday
before, December 6, the Obama Administration announced an extension of the
existing five-year eagle take permit. Effective immediately, the new rule
issued by the Department of Interior (DOI) will grant 30-year permits allowing
wind farms to “accidently kill federally protected eagles.” The “rule” is in
direct violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act passed by Congress
in 1940. Once again, executive action trumps the law. The DOI decision prompted
this response from Mike Daulton, vice president of government relations for the
National Audubon Society: “This is going to lead to more dead eagles—plain and
simple.”
To encourage Interior Secretary Jewell to reverse the
decision, the National Audubon Society has set up a direct email option with a
customizable letter to Secretary Jewell that states: “The 30-year permit rule
is a blank check for the wind industry and provides no comfort or confidence at
all that you will be protecting America’s majestic Bald and Golden Eagles and
safeguarding their populations.”
Like the expiration of the DOE loan guarantee program has
increased the likelihood populations of migratory birds will survive death by
renewables, the pending expiration of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind
energy could help the eagles and other raptors that are attracted to the
towering turbines.
A December 12 WSJ editorial, Powering Down the Wind
Subsidy, points out, as the subtitle states: “How Congress can achieve
something by doing nothing.” The WSJ is encouraging Congress to “do nothing”
and allow the PTC to expire as scheduled on December 31—which would save
taxpayers $18 billion over the next five years. Expire it may, as the current
budget deal takes away last minute negotiations that got it extended last
year—but that doesn’t mean it is really gone. The PTC has expired several times
in its twenty-year history and has always been extended retroactively—which is
what we may be facing this year. The WSJ states: “The wind lobby is now trying
to get the subsidy included in a January ‘tax extender’ package and made retroactive.”
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chairman of the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, on December 13, for the first time hinted,
according to Politico.com, that he may push the Senate to consider a tax
extenders package. Wyden said: “If you didn't have tax reform and you didn't
have extenders, you’d do crushing damage to solar, wind and renewables.” No
mention was made of the “crushing damage” to America’s migratory bird
population or to the bald and golden eagles.
Wyden will likely have his way. While, as I’ve written
previously, Republicans generally oppose government subsidies and support the
energy that actually works, and Democrats, like Wyden, tend to favor government
giveaways and support the energy that they “hope” will “change” and actually
work—there are plenty of Republicans who will help him push the “extenders”
package and give the PTC back (despite the probable expiration on December 31).
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance
Committee, where the PTC extension originates, and he recently predicted a PTC
extension. With just a handful of Republicans, such as Orin Hatch (UT), Pat
Roberts (KS), John Thune (SD), and Mike Crapo (ID)—all of whom voted for the
extension in 2012, the PTC could be hailed a “bipartisan victory.”
Think of all the millions of birds being killed by
renewables. Think of the billions of taxpayer dollars that have gone down the
drain in “the quest for the holy grail of cheap renewable power.” Whether you
oppose death by renewables for avian or economic reasons isn’t important. But
what does matter is making your opposition heard. Send your customizable
National Audubon Society letter to Secretary Jewell and contact the Republican
Senators listed above and tell them to stop supporting wind welfare.
No comments:
Post a Comment