Environmental fight: Tortoises vs. solar energy

[phantom power]

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. – A federal assessment shows more than 3,000 desert tortoises that are threatened with extinction would be disturbed by a California solar project, and up to 700 of the young turtles would be killed during construction.

...

In a statement, company spokesman Kelley Wachs said the government projections "are not consistent with the actual numbers of tortoise found on the project site."

"It appears that the largest concentrations of tortoise are outside the project and in areas that we designed the project to avoid," Wachs said.

The Riverside Press-Enterprise reported that the BLM's new assessment estimates that up to 162 adult tortoises in the project area will have to be captured and moved and up to 700 juvenile tortoises would be killed during construction.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110428/ap_on_re_us/us_solar_project_tortoise

[FBaggins]

1. Doesn't seem like an insurmountable problem.

They're just talking about the contruction period and not an in-operation issue?

I wouldn't think that's all that big a deal.

[phantom power]

2. I would expect construction to be worst. One thing I always think of re: desert installations...

is how we have warnings up all over the sonoran desert parks about not walking off the trails. If you disturb the plant life, it can take 75 years or so for it to grow back.

That's the sonoran desert, and it's not the same desert ecosystem over there. So I don't know what the recovery time is. I also don't know what the operational impact would look like. It's arguably worth building at least a few of these things purely in the name of discovering how they really turn out. Because there's no laboratory like The World.

[RC]

3. Sure, let's pave over the deserts with solar panels.

It is only Nature after all. Aren't we more important? :sarcasm:

[CJvR]

4. Well...

...of all the ecosystems we have destroyed a desert is probably the least important to us.

[txlibdem]

5. How many millions of creatures are killed or displaced for each suburban development?

So-called "environmentalists" love to stake out a tiny little postage stamp of land and devote their lives to "protecting" it. That's great, except global climate change isn't going to respect your protest signs and frivolous lawsuits. The real truth is that the deserts in America's southwest are the best place to put huge solar power plants. And if we do not end our use of fossil fuels ASAP then we will be dooming millions of species to extinction -- most of which aren't on the "protected" list today. These myopic activists who want to save 1 species are, in effect, dooming millions of species.

How much is it worth to save the oceans, a vast ecosystem that is today threatened by our use of coal and other fossil fuels due to ocean acidification. Corals are dying already and by 2050 they will all be gone. Corals are important for the ocean ecosystem but more important for baby fishes to have a safe place to hide from predators. It is possible that when all the coral are gone the entire ocean food chain could collapse.

Global Climate Change, unabated, will kill all of those desert creatures by either super droughts that last decades or by super floods that deluge areas that almost never see rain. That is why it is called Global Climate Change. Your little postage stamp of land with 1 "special" creature on it is going to suffer just like the rest of the species on Earth.

But it's only nature after all. Aren't we more important? :sarcasm: :dunce:

[RC]

7. So help the destruction along be roofing over the desert?

Yeah, okeeee.

[txlibdem]

8. Either you didn't read the post you're replying to or are ignoring the truth for another reason

"Help the destruction by roofing over the desert?" That statement shows your ignorance of the subject of solar and renewable energy in general.

Only a tiny portion of the desert could supply 100% of the energy needs of the US. The alternative is to doom millions of species by continued use of fossil fuels.

The few species in the desert whose survival niche exists today will be wiped out by global climate change. So what are you saving? In the end, nothing. Causing species death is not what I'd call a hallmark of an environmentalist.

[RC]

9. Don't kid yourself.

It would take hundreds of square miles of solar to supply that kind of power.

[txlibdem]

10. That's an inflated estimate

It would take less than that because we will also be building wind farms in a vast area that stretches from West Texas all the way to the Canadian border. And offshore wind along the entire Atlantic coast, the Texas gulf coast, and many parts off the Pacific coast.

Then there is geothermal, tidal and wave power that will be added in to help out as well.

But let's take your estimate of hundreds of square miles. That would be terrible to see hundreds of square miles of land destroyed. BTW, what do you think mountain top removal to get coal has done already??? But let's not talk about facts or truth when it's your little playground that's at stake, eh?

Let's also not mention the millions of species that will go extinct from global climate change -- including those on your own tiny little postage stamp of land that you want to "protect." Most of the species that will go extinct are NOT currently on the endangered list today. Corals will be gone from the world by 2050 because of fossil fuel use (coal, oil and natural gas). When the corals are gone the ocean ecology will be in jeopardy of total collapse. Funny how one pivotal species is so unimportant to you while another is worth killing every other living for.

[Confusious]

12. You are obviously in the pocket of big nuclear/coal/gas

If you have any doubts about renewables. The turtles are obviously against renewables, since their breeding ground is in the way of this project.

I'm paraphrasing another poster from around here, BTW

[txlibdem]

13. Ya ever watch the Bill Murray movie called "Stripes"

Your post reminds me of one of the characters, "My friends call me The Cruiser cuz I like fast cars and fast women."

Then John Candy says...

[Confusious]

14. Long long time ago

I barely remember it now. I'll have to check it out again.

[BrightKnight]

6. Is that the only place with sunlight? - n/t

[txlibdem]

11. It's the most cost effective place, most sunny days per year, highest sun energy potential

Check out the solar energy maps from "the GubMint" which are for solar PV (aka solar panels) and Concentrating Solar Power.
I got the maps from this page: http://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html


Solar PV map:



Concentrating Solar Power map: