Hey all, hope you’ll read my latest L.A. Times column and let me know what you think! Here’s how it starts:
>A single federal agency oversees nearly a quarter-billion acres of public lands — and those acres could play a key role in fighting climate change by hosting vast fields of solar panels and wind turbines that limit our need to burn fossil fuels.
>
>The American public could embrace this latest evolution of our shared domain.
>
>Or we could reject further industrial development of our public lands and instead preserve them for the sake of wildlife habitat, healthy ecosystems and scenic hikes — while requiring renewable energy companies to find other places to build.
>
>So which should we choose: clean energy or conservation?
>
>Right now, President Biden is trying to thread the needle.
>
>The Biden administration released its long-awaited Western Solar Plan last month, laying out a vision for where sprawling solar farms should be allowed — and where they should be blocked — across 11 Western states, including California. The plan covers 162 million acres overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and tentatively concludes that companies should be able to propose solar projects across 22 million acres — an area roughly the size of Maine.
>
>That’s a whole lot of land. If you hadn’t noticed, though, global warming is fueling a whole lot of harm: heat waves surpassing 120 degrees in Los Angeles County, Lake Mead falling to record lows, catastrophic megafloods doubling in likelihood. Plants and animals are feeling the strain too, with fast-rising temperatures pushing many species toward extinction.
>
>“It’s going to take everything to meet the climate challenge,” said Laura Daniel-Davis, a top official at the U.S. Interior Department. “It’s important that our shared public lands be part of meeting our clean energy goals.”
Again, hope you’ll read the whole thing and let me know what you think. You can sign up to get my columns and news roundups in your inbox here: [latimes.com/boilingpoint](https://latimes.com/boilingpoint).
Thanks for fighting the good fight. I didn’t read the article cause I was too lazy to work my way past the block.
Did you include some consideration of the ecosystems the solar panels will create? Those will be especially useful given climate change. Not ideal, but an opportunity at least.
Also, those 22 million acres, does that mean they would all be needed or do they mean they are designated areas that could be used and we only need a smaller portion to meet our objectives?
There’s nothing wrong with climate change.
More plants. Humans are a tropical species, after all.
3 comments
Hey all, hope you’ll read my latest L.A. Times column and let me know what you think! Here’s how it starts:
>A single federal agency oversees nearly a quarter-billion acres of public lands — and those acres could play a key role in fighting climate change by hosting vast fields of solar panels and wind turbines that limit our need to burn fossil fuels.
>
>The American public could embrace this latest evolution of our shared domain.
>
>Or we could reject further industrial development of our public lands and instead preserve them for the sake of wildlife habitat, healthy ecosystems and scenic hikes — while requiring renewable energy companies to find other places to build.
>
>So which should we choose: clean energy or conservation?
>
>Right now, President Biden is trying to thread the needle.
>
>The Biden administration released its long-awaited Western Solar Plan last month, laying out a vision for where sprawling solar farms should be allowed — and where they should be blocked — across 11 Western states, including California. The plan covers 162 million acres overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and tentatively concludes that companies should be able to propose solar projects across 22 million acres — an area roughly the size of Maine.
>
>That’s a whole lot of land. If you hadn’t noticed, though, global warming is fueling a whole lot of harm: heat waves surpassing 120 degrees in Los Angeles County, Lake Mead falling to record lows, catastrophic megafloods doubling in likelihood. Plants and animals are feeling the strain too, with fast-rising temperatures pushing many species toward extinction.
>
>“It’s going to take everything to meet the climate challenge,” said Laura Daniel-Davis, a top official at the U.S. Interior Department. “It’s important that our shared public lands be part of meeting our clean energy goals.”
Again, hope you’ll read the whole thing and let me know what you think. You can sign up to get my columns and news roundups in your inbox here: [latimes.com/boilingpoint](https://latimes.com/boilingpoint).
Thanks for fighting the good fight. I didn’t read the article cause I was too lazy to work my way past the block.
Did you include some consideration of the ecosystems the solar panels will create? Those will be especially useful given climate change. Not ideal, but an opportunity at least.
Also, those 22 million acres, does that mean they would all be needed or do they mean they are designated areas that could be used and we only need a smaller portion to meet our objectives?
There’s nothing wrong with climate change.
More plants. Humans are a tropical species, after all.