Wyoming legislator pushes for accountability from wind and solar projects over wildlife impact.

9 comments

1. But not oil, right?

2. Does it equally apply to all energy or just renewables? I am fine with the first.

3. Some background:

   Wyoming state government income is heavily dependent on mineral royalties. The Wyoming coal industry is collapsing, hitting the state where it hurts.

   Trump cut mineral royalties as a sop to the coal industry, and this is adding to the pain Wyoming is feeling.

   Wyoming has very good wind and (thanks to its high altitude) solar resources, but despite investor interest the state has been slow to pivot.

4. A hectare of solar farm can power about 500 times as many EV vehicle-km vs a hectare of monocrop corn turned into ethanol for fuel cars (not a typo, the efficiency of biofuels and small fuel engines are both terrible). Let even just 1 hectare go fallow (via cutting corn subsidies) for every 1 hectare of solar and wildlife would be very far ahead.

5. The wildlife impacts from wind and solar are real. Are oil and gas worse? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t do everything we can to minimize the impacts from wind and solar anyways. And there are plenty of dedicated professionals working every day to make sure those impacts are as small as possible. Pretending these impacts don’t exist doesn’t help these folks do their work.

6. I laugh every time I read about a politician that suddenly develops a concern for wildlife.

7. The should expand this to cover all forms of energy production. And not just from the production, but from use as well.

8. Sure, right after outdoor cat owners are held accountable.

9. Republicans care about wild life??

Comments are closed.