The Green Pushback

by Deb Powers

The Green push back against mass renewable energy has begun - and it's challenging assumptions on many sides. Some folks have called it NIMBYism - but to do so is a bit disingenuous when you consider that many of the people protesting the installation of large scale solar, wind and hydro power plants are not protesting in their own backyards. They are protesting out of genuine concern for the environment. The NIMBY label is far too facile - and it's pre-loaded with negative associations that can be exploited to mow down opposition to plans as easily as the desire for a greener planet can be exploited to make existing energy companies and utilities lots and lots of money.

Let me be clear here - I have nothing against people making money on the green revolution. I think the greening of the world is a good thing. I believe we must move away from the large-scale burning of anything to create power and toward ways of generating electricity that do not put our planet in danger. I also happen to believe that the release of greenhouse gasses is not the be-all and end-all of that danger.

As I've collected news for the reNewsable Today column here at BlogonSmog over the past few months, I've had a growing sense of unease mingled with the excitement of watching a new industry take off. The adoption of green by major utilities - the contracts to build multi-megawatt generating stations - the focus shifting more and more to how much money can be made by investing in green energy companies that generate power for tens of thousands of people - it started striking a discordant note.

I tried to tell myself that it's just my "natural" distrust of corporations - but there's nothing natural about that mistrust. It's been learned over decades of watching and decades of researching how big business does business, and the understanding that the green they're interested in promoting folds nicely into their pockets. There's nothing wrong with that - I have nothing against making money - but over and over throughout history, we've learned that the bigger a corporation gets, the less likely it is that they'll be troubled by little things like killing off local wildlife, poisoning water, making the air unbreathable and ultimately, destroying the planet.

De-Greening Green Energy

It's been a commonly accepted tenet that the green energy movement would not have arrived until we found a way to generate mass quantities of reliable energy via solar, wind, wave or other renewable energy sources - in other words, not until the generation of green energy could be made profitable and attractive to major utilities. We've reached that point - in part because of the need to meet new energy transmision standards. All over the world, major utility companies that have fought tooth and nail against transitioning from coal-fired energy plants to cleaner energy are signing on to green energy initiatives in droves.

And as they do, they're putting the major money they used to use to fight wind, solar and other renewable energies into making large scale renewable energy installations sound like the Land of Milk and Honey. It's all about the New Green Technology which can create green jobs, save the economy and the planet and, presumably, leap tall buildings in a single bound. I can't even start to calculate the amount of advertising money being suddenly poured into ads supporting and touting the generation of clean, green energy as the Holy Grail - and that kind of money makes me nervous about motive - because the motive is usually to make more money, and the method is usually to ignore any inconvenient facts that might impact the ability to make as much money as possible.

Again, let me be clear. I have nothing against making money. In the best of all possible worlds, making green energy, green money and green jobs truly would be a win-win-win solution for everyone. And I honestly believe that sustainable, renewable energy generation and delivery does have the potential to be a win-win-win situation - as long as all the wins are balanced. Unfortunately, the evidence is starting to show that as usual, the profit end of things is heavily weighting its end of the scale, at least when it comes to huge solar and wind energy plants - and to some extent tidal energy plants - that will generate gigawatts of power for masses of people.

The dangers of going green too big

Over the past several weeks, small stories have been appearing in newspapers here and there around the world. At a town meeting, a group of people express concerns about the health problems associated with wind towers situated nearby. A West Virginia town bans hilltop wind towers for aesthetic reasons. An expert on sea life points out that large-scale tidal energy plants disrupt the migration patterns of schools of fish. There are concerns about birds getting caught up in wind turbines, and studies refuting the claim that cite relatively small numbers of birds actually affected. And the one that actually made me sit up and take notice -birds flying into the superheated air above solar concentrator stations and being fried in midair.

Now that's one I hadn't thought of. I've been reading about the plans for super-plants in the Gobi Desert in China and in the Sahara in Africa and in the Mojave in North America - acres and acres of huge mirrors directing the sunlight at towers which use the heat to boil water or heat sand or store it in some other way. These installations could, say the developers, generate enough energy to provide all the power that the whole world needs - we just need to find ways to transmit it.

I'm enough of a tech geek that those installations are beautiful to me - but then, I think wind turbines are aesthetically pleasing, so what do I know? I gave a passing thought to the disruption of the ecology of those regions - but honestly, I don't know enough about it to understand how those mirrors and towers would affect the animal and plant life in the deep deserts. But then I read one small factoid in an article about the green push back - the presence of those mirrors and the concentrated light and heat would warm the air above the solar installations to 800 F. Birds flying into that superheated air would be incinerated.

My concern isn't for the birds so much, though. It's in wondering about the effect of that super-heating on the environment in general. How would it disrupt weather patterns? What would it do to the micro-climate on the ground? How far around the perimeter of the plant would be completely uninhabitable for anything alive? And more pointedly - have we really thought through all the implications of building huge power generation plants?

So we fry a few birds in the process...

Let me digress. I have a friend who is awed and amazed by technology. He believes that man is a marvelous creature who has overcome the adversities of having less muscle, less speed and less natural physical abilities by sheer brain power. He feels that man is majestic, and that those who call for more responsibility in our use of technology are apologists for the human race. As I was reading about the dangers that huge solar mirrors hold for birds, I could hear him in the back of my mind saying, with a shrug, "So we fry a few birds. What's the big deal?"

And that, I suppose, is the attitude that I fear. The ends do not always justify the means and the sacrifice of a few for the greater good is not always an attitude that I espouse. How long before "so we fry a few birds" becomes "so a couple of people get cancer"?

I am not trying to be a naysayer. I support the transition from coal-powered energy to greener forms of energy - but more and more, I find myself favoring distributed energy generation over centralized energy installations - solar panels over desert power stations, half a dozen wind turbines to power a neighborhood, a driveway that collects solar for use in the house.

The problem with individual adoption of solar, wind and other renewable energy forms is that it will not be profitable on a large scale for the major players in the energy sweepstakes. It will generalize and spread profits to multiple manufacturers of renewable energy equipment for residential, retail and industrial use - but it will not supply an ongoing market for generated energy by central players. Without the promise of that steady stream of income, many of the investors who are stepping up with wallets in hand would melt away into the woodwork.

More reading about the green energy push back

 When Locals Push Back

Pros and cons of wind farms

Turbines may hurt local wildlife

Environmentalists clash