Renewable energy projects can have environmental consequences. This is especially true of large, or utility scale projects, where environmental groups see things like habitat destruction as more damaging than the long-term benefits from renewable power possibly displacing fossil fuel derived electricity. The most high-profile issue for large solar plants in the Western US has been water—the projects can have very substantial water needs and are typically located in areas where there are pre-existing challenges with water scarcity, and some environmental groups have worked very hard to stop solar development in these areas.

William Hsu

VP, Corporation Development, Clean Focus Corporation

Posted on May 25, 2011

I believe that the conservatory bodies (Sierra Club, TNC, etc) have been too aggressive in their efforts to halt large Solar Projects in the Western US. Originally water was the issue, but now the issue is the the various animal species that live in that part of the desert. I believe that we need more balance in evaluating and ultimately deciding where large scale solar get built.

Elias Hinckley Replied on May 26, 2011

I wouldn’t disagree. I think your point raises a couple issues that underlie the question.

The first is the role that environmentalist have played in the evolution of renewable energy, and more importantly (for my thinking at any rate), how do the two groups move forward (renewable energy development and the environmental movement) as the industry grows. It does seem like there’s more friction in this relationship than there should be given the net impact of a utility scale solar development as opposed to some other energy developments.

And I think the second piece is the more broad question of why we do not have (or if we can have) a rational and clear energy policy that can weigh questions like relative impacts.

Rick Kadet

Vice President, Senior CFO Consultant, The Brenner Group, Inc.

Posted on May 26, 2011

Regretfully, over the centuries, humans have proved insensitive to the environment in the name of development. Our environmental movement in the last century exposed many of our destructive practices in poluting the air, water and land with toxic materials. The lost of animal and plant species was substantial and documented by scientists.

The 21st century is more about global warming, population control and declining fossil fuel resources making technologies like solar, nuclear and wind power center stage. We are now learning that despite the attractiveness of these seemingly renewal and low carbon power sources, that their use is not benign. Large wind farms kill birds and interrupt normal wind patterns. Solar energy covers large amounts of land inhabited by plants, birds and animals. Our environmental movement rightly insists that we look at these impacts before jumping head first into a project.

I am not an expert in siting of such projects. But it is right that environmental impacts be examined and that large land areas not be appropriated for solar without some understanding of the impact on the creatures that live there. Because of ambitious goals for renewable energy, the government along with interested parties including environmentalists, electric utilities and solar power companies need to reach an understanding of an acceptable set of tradeoffs so that solar projects can come to market with an acceptable but not stifling set of regulations.

-1

Bob Gately

Owner, Gately Consulting

Posted on May 26, 2011

Wouldn't the world be better a better place to live if humans just went away? Long live the fauna and flora.