Article about solar farm impacts

[Bowmannate2000]

I thought this was a pretty good article exploring some of the negative impacts of solar farms. I hope it can make an impact before they blanket many more hundreds of thousands of acres of BLM.

Solar farms Guardian

 

[88man]

No comments from the BHA Boys

 

[Harold357]

I am also caught by surprise that members of #backcountryhuntersandanglers, #bha have not spent more time talking about the successful renewable projects on public land. Their president Land Tawney endorsed the development of these projects and the Biden Administration has been able to permit an unprecedented amount of public land and offshore water for renewable energy development. What a success this public land renewable development has proven to be under President Biden.

The Biden administration is set to beat its 25 GW by 2025 onshore clean energy goal – and it needs to tell everyone

The Biden administration set a goal to permit 25 GW of solar, onshore wind, and geothermal energy on public lands by 2025. It will beat that.

electrek.co

 

[Irrelevant]

No comments from the BHA Boys

They're shitty. Satisfied?

 

[Irrelevant]

I am also caught by surprise that members of #backcountryhuntersandanglers, #bha have not spent more time talking about the successful renewable projects on public land. Their president Land Tawney endorsed the development of these projects and the Biden Administration has been able to permit an unprecedented amount of public land and offshore water for renewable energy development. What a success this public land renewable development has proven to be under President Biden.

The Biden administration is set to beat its 25 GW by 2025 onshore clean energy goal – and it needs to tell everyone

The Biden administration set a goal to permit 25 GW of solar, onshore wind, and geothermal energy on public lands by 2025. It will beat that.

electrek.co

Many BHA members have expressed remorse, resentment, skepticism, doubt, etc. On the endorsement of these none renewable energy developments both here on HT and with the brass of BHA, me included. But off shore is the least of my worries, and I'm not going to ditch BHA because I disagree with them on this topic.

 

[jryoung]

When did PLREDA get passed? Pretty sure it has been introduced since the 116th and current 118th but not yet passed? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Harold357]

Many BHA members have expressed remorse, resentment, skepticism, doubt, etc. On the endorsement of these none renewable energy developments both here on HT and with the brass of BHA, me included. But off shore is the least of my worries, and I'm not going to ditch BHA because I disagree with them on this topic.

Hello neffa3,

Thank you for your response to my post related to the development of renewable energy on public land and in public waters. Your response has helped me understand the potential outlook that Backcountry Hunters and Angler, #BHA, members may hold related to the development of these public resources and their membership status or support for this 501c3 non-profit organization.

It is important to understand the expansion and development of renewable, low or none carbon emitting sources of energy has been made a priority by the Biden Harris Administration in achieving net zero carbon emissions. Net zero carbon emissions is a crucial milestone in tackling the climate crisis. The Biden Harris Aministration has referred to the climate crisis as an existential threat to humans with legislative allies of the administration citing dates up to and including 2050 for achieving net zero carbon emissions.

The article provided in my post and documentation available through a variety of official United States government sources (such as EO 14008 of January 27, 2021 and 43 USC Ch 48: Renewable Energy Production on Federal Land) have identified a production goal of AT LEAST 25 gigawatts of renewable energy production on federal public land. These efforts are absolutely critical in helping the United States meet its goals since rejoining the Paris Climate Accord under the Biden Harris Administration.

In order to facilitate this process, the Biden Harris Adminstration has worked diligently to relax permitting restrictions for federal land renewable energy projects. BLM reports there are approximate 245 million acres of public land suitable for renewable development available to meet these net zero emission goals. In 2022, DOI approved more than 12 large scale projects to support these renewable energy goals. Additionally, DOI reported more than 50 in house project applications for federal land renewable at the start of 2023. How remarkable.

Your post suggests that you are not concerned with development of offshore renewable projects. It is my impression based on personal correspondences and internet based reading that many other #BHA members are also unconcerned about this offshore renewable energy development. Particularly amongst trout fisherman and hunters, many #bha members are focused primarily on public resources in the western United States; however these offshore resources included those along the eastern seaboard are an important resource to many people for their livelihood and reactional needs alike. Additionally, the biodiversity in these environments play a key role in regional and global ecosystem health so it is important not to disregard them.

Do not worry, I want to assure you that based on my research and publicly available media, the Biden Harris Administration has done everything possible to help these offshore projects move forward including the awarding the largest energy lease by geographic area in United States history.

It is fascinating to know that public land resources have such an important role to play in meeting the Biden Harris Administrations renewable energy goals. I know many on this forum also interested in this topic and the implications it has on public resources land and water resources. It is my belief that the Biden Harris Administration's ambitions plans for renewable energy projects on federal land would not have been possible without the support of so many environmental groups, conservation groups, such as Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and influencers.

As President Joe Biden's EO 14008 States, "Even as our Nation emerges from profound public health and economic crises borne of a pandemic, we face a climate crisis that threatens our people and communities, public health and economy, and, starkly, our ability to live on Planet Earth. Despite that peril that is already evident, there is promise in the solutions opportunities to create well paying union jobs to build modern and sustainable infrastructure, deliver an equitable, clean, energy future, and put the the United States on a path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050. We must trust the science and act."

 

[teamwhitebelly]

Trust the science??? How did that work out for the plandemic?? Mom nature controls us we have NO control over her and never will!

 

[whatnot]

I follow tge local BHA fb page, it's helpful with alerting to upcoming legislation that is troublesome.

But I cannot fathom how a group that is for expanding access to public ground, turns around and supports solar farms on it. Seems like leadership political leanings outweigh their groups stated purpose.

 

[seeth07]

I really like this quote from that article. I also didn't know about the crazy old age of the vegetation in the desert and the vast root systems before reading this article and found that very interesting

“There are so many other places we should be putting solar,” says Clarke, of the National Parks Conservation Association, from homes to warehouses to parking lots and industrial zones. He describes the current model of large-scale, centralised power generation, hundreds of miles from where the power is actually needed, as “a 20th-century business plan for a 21st-century problem”.

“The conversion of intact wildlife habitat should be the absolute last resort, but it’s become our first resort – just because it’s the easy fix.”

 

[Moserkr]

@Harold357 WTF kind of pre-meditated political AI response was that??

 

[JLS]

I am not bot.

 

[sclancy27]

Alternative "green" energy is no different than the fossil fuel industry, it's all about who can make a ton of money. The fact that the gov't is not enormously subsidizing solar on existing infrastructure (homes, apartment buildings, factories) and at the same time not going all in on nuclear energy says all that needs to be said. They are not interested in solving the problem, they are interested in making $$$ with no care for the resource.

 

[jryoung]

Alternative "green" energy is no different than the fossil fuel industry, it's all about who can make a ton of money. The fact that the gov't is not enormously subsidizing solar on existing infrastructure (homes, apartment buildings, factories) and at the same time not going all in on nuclear energy says all that needs to be said. They are not interested in solving the problem, they are interested in making $$$ with no care for the resource.

Nuclear makes the economic equation more complicated. Outside of the market component Vogtle has been a massive struggle.

Why the U.S. government plans to spend billions to keep money-losing nuclear plants open

The U.S. government is spending billions of dollars to prop up some money-losing nuclear plants, which it needs to stay open to meet its clean energy goals.

www.cnbc.com

 

[sclancy27]

Nuclear makes the economic equation more complicated. Outside of the market component Vogtle has been a massive struggle.

Why the U.S. government plans to spend billions to keep money-losing nuclear plants open

The U.S. government is spending billions of dollars to prop up some money-losing nuclear plants, which it needs to stay open to meet its clean energy goals.

www.cnbc.com

Th only reason they are putting in tons of wind/solar is the govt has big incentives. Nuclear is tailored much more to the way our grid demand works, solar and wind would be fine as minor components, but without reasonable storage capacity they are useless in the big picture. Nothing can completely fill our electrical needs single handedly, we will always need multiple sources, including fossil fuels. At least if when you want the lights or AC to run

 

[more_cowbell]

Th only reason they are putting in tons of wind/solar is the govt has big incentives. Nuclear is tailored much more to the way our grid demand works, solar and wind would be fine as minor components, but without reasonable storage capacity they are useless in the big picture. Nothing can completely fill our electrical needs single handedly, we will always need multiple sources, including fossil fuels. At least if when you want the lights or AC to run

Will be interesting to see if again this summer and due to power grid constraints, California asks EV drivers to not charge their vehicles during certain parts of the day

 

[Harold357]

@Harold357 WTF kind of pre-meditated political AI response was that??

Did my response not characterize the administration's goals outlined in the executive order and other documentation regarding the development of renewable resources on federal land? Please note which portions are not characterized or summarized properly.

 

[Irrelevant]

Hello neffa3,

Thank you for your response to my post related to the development of renewable energy on public land and in public waters. Your response has helped me understand the potential outlook that Backcountry Hunters and Angler, #BHA, members may hold related to the development of these public resources and their membership status or support for this 501c3 non-profit organization.

It is important to understand the expansion and development of renewable, low or none carbon emitting sources of energy has been made a priority by the Biden Harris Administration in achieving net zero carbon emissions. Net zero carbon emissions is a crucial milestone in tackling the climate crisis. The Biden Harris Aministration has referred to the climate crisis as an existential threat to humans with legislative allies of the administration citing dates up to and including 2050 for achieving net zero carbon emissions.

The article provided in my post and documentation available through a variety of official United States government sources (such as EO 14008 of January 27, 2021 and 43 USC Ch 48: Renewable Energy Production on Federal Land) have identified a production goal of AT LEAST 25 gigawatts of renewable energy production on federal public land. These efforts are absolutely critical in helping the United States meet its goals since rejoining the Paris Climate Accord under the Biden Harris Administration.

In order to facilitate this process, the Biden Harris Adminstration has worked diligently to relax permitting restrictions for federal land renewable energy projects. BLM reports there are approximate 245 million acres of public land suitable for renewable development available to meet these net zero emission goals. In 2022, DOI approved more than 12 large scale projects to support these renewable energy goals. Additionally, DOI reported more than 50 in house project applications for federal land renewable at the start of 2023. How remarkable.

Your post suggests that you are not concerned with development of offshore renewable projects. It is my impression based on personal correspondences and internet based reading that many other #BHA members are also unconcerned about this offshore renewable energy development. Particularly amongst trout fisherman and hunters, many #bha members are focused primarily on public resources in the western United States; however these offshore resources included those along the eastern seaboard are an important resource to many people for their livelihood and reactional needs alike. Additionally, the biodiversity in these environments play a key role in regional and global ecosystem health so it is important not to disregard them.

Do not worry, I want to assure you that based on my research and publicly available media, the Biden Harris Administration has done everything possible to help these offshore projects move forward including the awarding the largest energy lease by geographic area in United States history.

It is fascinating to know that public land resources have such an important role to play in meeting the Biden Harris Administrations renewable energy goals. I know many on this forum also interested in this topic and the implications it has on public resources land and water resources. It is my belief that the Biden Harris Administration's ambitions plans for renewable energy projects on federal land would not have been possible without the support of so many environmental groups, conservation groups, such as Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and influencers.

As President Joe Biden's EO 14008 States, "Even as our Nation emerges from profound public health and economic crises borne of a pandemic, we face a climate crisis that threatens our people and communities, public health and economy, and, starkly, our ability to live on Planet Earth. Despite that peril that is already evident, there is promise in the solutions opportunities to create well paying union jobs to build modern and sustainable infrastructure, deliver an equitable, clean, energy future, and put the the United States on a path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050. We must trust the science and act."

The chances of me reading that tiatribe are less than 1. Hell my 9 year could tell a story faster.

 

[jryoung]

Th only reason they are putting in tons of wind/solar is the govt has big incentives. Nuclear is tailored much more to the way our grid demand works, solar and wind would be fine as minor components, but without reasonable storage capacity they are useless in the big picture. Nothing can completely fill our electrical needs single handedly, we will always need multiple sources, including fossil fuels. At least if when you want the lights or AC to run

Speaking of subsidies, this was a study conducted by the nuclear industry about a decade ago. Certainly the mix has changed, but it's important context when we talk about subsidies.

 

[more_cowbell]

Did my response not characterize the administration's goals outlined in the executive order and other documentation regarding the development of renewable resources on federal land? Please note which portions are not characterized or summarized properly.

errorDP_DETECTED_FATAL_ERROR