Those of you who've argued with other environmentalists about the wisdom of destroying old-growth desert for 20 years of electricity production will know that there are certain arguments that come up with depressing regularity. It can be deadeningly repetitive, and that gets old after a while. But now, in the best tradition of overused Internet tropes, you can at least play Bingo as you educate.
And if you see some of your own favorite arguments on this Bingo card, please note the wise words of Kate Harding, who said:
When a Bingo card exists, it's not for shutting down discussion. It's for avoiding rehash of discussion that already happened. You're late.
| B | I | N | G | O |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Now you're opposing solar power? You enviros just oppose everything! | You want solar in your backyards instead of 500 miles away because you're a NIMBY | There's enough room in the desert! I know because I fly over it all the time. | Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything! | Climate change will doom the deserts anyway, so let's pave them now. |
| But this 50 megawatt plant will power 750,000 homes! | If tortoises are so rare, why are there so many of them on the solar sites? | This 100-mile square in the desert on this 200-pixel-wide map of North America doesn't seem like that big a deal | Some HOA somewhere objected to a solar panel, so we have to put them in the desert | OMG THORIUM but build desert solar until then |
| Yes, it's destructive, but the bighorn sheep have to take one for the team. | You're being paid by the coal companies. | FREE SPACE |
Yes, deserts are delicate, so we shouldn't make more of them | There's nothing out there but dust and hardpan. |
| I drove across the desert when I was in college and I didn't see any valuable species. | I agree we shouldn't destroy habitat, so let's pave 100s of square miles of intact desert wildlands that don't have habitat | This land is heavily impacted. I found a beer can there. | You're being paid by the oil companies. | They only trim the vegetation under the mirrors. |
| You're just climate change denialists. | OMG FUSION but build desert solar until then | We agree about this habitat and thus crafted an agreement to preserve some completely different place. | WE NEED IT ALL so that we can live within sustainable limits | This land is heavily impacted. You can see a road over there. |
Brilliant!
BTW, I’m sorry about Zeke. I’m sorry you had to leave the desert. But remember: both will always live inside you. They are a part of you.
Reason voted most popular by a poll of pseudoenvironmentalists:
Climate change will doom the deserts anyway so let’s pave over them now.
“Climate change is so awful that it justifies any environmental crime” while ignoring alternatives.
It is the Big Solar Nuremburg Defense (remember “Thank You for Smoking”?)
Laugh Out Loud! That is too funny, yes I’ve heard all of those.
I’ve been screamed at by so many environmentalists (I’m calling them nice names here) who insist we must destroy the desert to save the world, that I’m not laughing any more. I’ve been called a “climate villain” by one nationally published Alternet writer who threatened to call me out to destroy my reputation, my business, and alienate my friends from me (who were certain to see things his way). All because I don’t see the logic in destroying miles of desert habitat, pushing threatened species like the desert tortoise toward extinction (and numerous species of birds), buldozing Native American cultural sites (all the while trampling on tribal rights), destroying the desert’s tourism business, and excluding meaningful public comment, while pushing a Washington corporate welfare agenda for large multinational corporations to get our tax funds to scrape barren miles of our nigh-on-free-to-them public lands, and then getting to charge us high “green” energy rates, under the auspices of “saving” the world.
Meanwhile, these environmentalists pay no attention to brownfield lands near population centers that could be used for these kinds of developments, they don’t want to hear about the electrical pollution that causes or exacerbates numerous medical problems, all because, once again, the desert is perceived as some kind of empty, barren wasteland with nothing in it worth saving.
Well, it’s not a wasteland. It’s a uniquely beautiful and vibrant ecosystem that looks rugged but is actually quite delicate in many ways. It is NOT the place for urban pseudo-intellectual environmental followers to dump your garbage, dump your sewage sludge, dump your radioactive waste, dump your felons, dump your sex offenders, dump your hydroelectric projects (yes, we have almost no water, but there is a hydroelectric project planned for Eagle Mountain that will use more power than it generates - that’s green!), dump your miles of industrial solar projects, dump your migration-chopping wind farms, or whatever other crazy idea gets in your heads.
So, I don’t have time to play Bingo, and I’m not laughing any more. I’m doing what I can to save what’s left, and I’m doing it while I’m grieving for the places that I loved that are already destroyed. With the support of mindless environmentalists for whom the desert is an abstraction, we’ve lost valuable habitat, priceless Native American cultural resources, stunning soul-reviving vistas and invaluable wild places. Who has turned out to be the biggest enemy of the environment in years? The Obama administration and many of the liberal urban environmentalists.
“I’ve been screamed at by so many environmentalists (I’m calling them nice names here) who insist we must destroy the desert to save the world, .....”
I suggest that ascribing these people as ‘environmentalists’ is a misnomer.
The deserts around the globe are sacrificial lambs and scapegoats, and have been for centuries. Although I privately call it ‘idiocy.’ And those that insist upon it, ‘idiots.’ But I guess that’s no longer private, is it….......
The question is how do we turn this around in the face of ‘economic growth’ and ‘climate change’ fever? Feverish people are usually delusional and unreasonable. We have a downhill battle.
Steve, your comments are felt very deeply. I too have been deeply engaged in fighting energy sprawl from solar and wind. I co-founded Basin and Range Watch.
I personally believe that the Solar Bingo is a good way to humiliate the ignorant “arm-chair” environmentalists who are convinced that solar and wind can do no wrong. It really brings the hypocisy of this “green” economy up front. These people are not familiar with the issues and the always say awful things like “solar panels will shade tortoises”. It’s time to laugh at their stupidity to get them out of the way.
It is kind of refreshing to be accused of not being angry enough over desert solar. Maybe there’s hope for my circulatory system yet.
Steve: a big stompin’ AMEN here.
I’m an environmentalist because of deserts. No way am I going to tolerate their destruction in the name of “environmentalism.”
Honestly, I think a lot of these people are speaking from a position of cowardice. We are in an environmental crisis, and the solutions at hand range from short-term and easy (toss the deserts under the bus, make cozy with big business) to long-term and difficult (rethinking energy use entirely).
They don’t want to give up on their own energy-dependent ways of living, nor challenge mainstream thinking, nor call out and fight powerful entities like corporations and government, because those things are risky and scary. So they toss the deserts out like a scrap of meat intended to appease a slavering beast, all the while refusing to see themselves as part of the same sick system.
This all reminds me of a Firesign Theater episode. “All out for Fort Stinkin’ Desert!!”
It’s one of the best concise satires on our American West history. And it’s being repeated again. And again.
Although I have to play Devil’s Advocate here and throw in a coyote bone: If all those who claim themselves as ‘Environmentalists’ can’t agree and work together, if the the movement to protect, conserve and preserve the quickly vanishing environment remains fractionated, it seems to me that nothing will get done. In fact, it will provide fuel to the opponents, like throwing deformed kittens to the wolves (sorry for the bad pun). There’s no cohesion, there’s no unity, there is no power. And the environment will fall.
I’ll be happy to unite with NRDC, TWS, CBD, and all the multi-million dollar nationals when they decide to be environmental advocates again. Until then, i’ll stick with the paltry few who care more about the earth than they do political access and sitting at the table with the big boys.
The schism in environmentalists (and the environmental) movement reminds me of that in ecologists and conservation biologists. Those that value ecosystems for their intrinsic values, and those that place instrumental value (mostly anthropomorphic-based) on ecosystems and, consequently, dictate trends in conservation and preservation biology.
Unfortunately, as our country’s archaic two-party system demonstrates, binary approaches don’t resolve conflicts, nor do they tend to solve the problems facing us. In other words, the two stands bicker and nothing gets done, while the vultures pick up the pieces and grow fat. The world and life are not black and white (it seems only human brains are). Meanwhile, biodiversity and the ecosystems they occupy are falling to the axe.
Perhaps it is time for all to put their cards and demands on the table and push the fact that no one, and neither side, will benefit and possibly survive for the long haul, continuing the way we are. Might start by asking all the ‘environmental’ groups/institutions/organizations what their values and goals are. And advocate that if we who truly want to save and preserve the environment, and all its inhabitants, we all need to agree on a stand. And stand on it without giving in or giving up.
Just a comment from the Coyote trickster, who also cares about his environment but sees we are making no progress on our current path.
In theory, I agree with you microbes. And sadly, over the last few years of my working on this issue, I have seen the major groups refuse to come to the table, steamroll their own membership and/or local chapters and even staff, in order to promote their funders’ agendas, and even go so far as to try to monkeywrench sincere conservation initiatives such as the Ivanpah ACEC because it interferes with their backchannel deal-making.
The national Sierra Club, NRDC, The Wilderness Society, and other mainstream enviro groups were all set in 2008 to offer the Ivanpah Valley on a platter to Big Solar so that they could claim to be “flexible” and “professional” when some other, theoretical worse project came along. They brooked no opposition and refused to discuss it. It was only due to the efforts of people like Laura and Kevin, who’ve commented above, who persisted in talking about the value of the place, its wildlife, its habitat and cultural values, that people outside the Boards of Directors of those green groups started hearing about what we were about to lose.
And the public responded: a record number of public comments came into the California Energy Commission on Ivanpah SEGS, groups started hearing from their members—and losing members when they refused to oppose Ivanpah. The press was quicker to act than the supposed activist groups. You don’t see a news article on Ivanpah SEGS now that doesn’t have the word “controversial” in it. That wasn’t supposed to happen. Ivanpah was supposed to be the slam dunk.
The astonishing thing for me was being part of a group from Solar Done Right that went to DC in 2010 to lobby for study of the effects of desert solar versus distributed generation, and we talked to a bunch of Congressional staff about the issue. Though there were a number of staff who were just starting out in learning about renewables, and one or two who were hostile, House staff on both the Energy and Natural Resources committees were so much farther along than any green group I know of in their understanding of desert ecosystems and the inherent stupidity of paving them for a couple decades of inefficient renewables.
When committee staff in even a Democratic-controlled House is deeper green than the greens, there is a serious problem.
So my strategy since then has been
1) talk directly to the public about the science involved in these desert ecosystems, and try to direct those people toward ethical, scientifically valid campaigns to protect those ecosystems, and
2) assume that the mainstream Green groups are going to be completely useless at best, and actively dishonest opponents at worst. That way, when a group does make a tiny little and utterly belated effort in the right direction, as with the Sierra Club’s recent gestures in favor of distributed generation, it’s a welcome surprise.
Thank you for your post documenting the schism in the Ivanpah issues. And I’m sure that is not the only exposition of division in our current environmental issues. I applaud you and the others for your perseverance, efforts and time. We need more of you.
It seems that attracting and gathering enough public support through education and media attention will perhaps push those top-heavy and questionable funding-dependent ‘environmental’ organizations back to their roots. At least, we hope so.
However, the battle is deeper; reaching down into the core values of this nation, its society and at many levels. I find it ironic and sardonically amusing that the push is always for production: more, more, more energy. Whereas the other side of the equation -consumption- is rarely addressed. Energy consumption and overpopulation seem to be taboo topics.
The other devil in disguise is NIMBY. People don’t want energy production in their backyards (or on their rooftops). One more reason why the desert is the perfect sacrificial lamb. Now, if celebrities, members of congress, and our in-the-public oil money men had solar panels on their roofs and in their backyards, imagine how fashionable that might become (coyote snickers).
There are three primary ways to motivate the sheeple: money, status and regulation. Some people are motivated by compassion, but they seem to be the minority. I try to retain optimism that education can influence the latter, and increase the ranks. Which is how I hope to convince small desert communities that they need to be more responsible and self-sufficient for providing their own energy and water, at individual and community levels.
There are rumblings of a private company installing huge solar arrays on private land in the northern Chihuahuan Desert area. I may contact you for some ammunition.
The deserts and their inhabitants thank you all for your efforts. Coyote says so.
Lately I am seeing how extremely important education is, such as Chris’s Desert Biodiversity.org site. Not just kids but the adults who call themselves environmentalists yet have no idea how many rare plants are living in a Mojave Desert alluvial fan, or what a tortoise does. Or what a desert is.
Last year I was asked to testify about Sage grouse in support of a 2-year Wind Moratorium in Idaho - basically scare the hell out of the Idaho good ‘ol boys with the reminder that if they didn’t put the break no Wind - it would contribute to SG listing which would unleash the feds to come down on their cattle and sheep on public lands.
Similarly, I testified about a particular Big Wind insult proposed for an incredible place called Brown’s Bench in southern Idaho, among the best sage grouse habitat in the area ~ beautiful place relatively untouched ~ and pleaded for the ‘time-out’ to establish better citing criteria, etc. in order to protect our state’s incredible natural values including wildlife and habitats.
It worked, for the most part - a large majority of Republicans on the committee voted in favor of the moratorium despite their extreme ideological aversion to any form of restraint to industrial development.
Unfortunately, every last Democrat voted against the bill.
The legislation failed to clear to the floor by one vote in committee.
Very true, Laura. However, what many educational efforts lack, for a variety of reasons, is immersion. By that, I mean phenomenological experience. Intimate contact -an immersion experience- with the environment strengthens and imprints understanding and empathy. And therefore instructs judgement, values, and action. It establishes a strong connection. People are more apt to take action to protect what they feel strongly connection with.
People are bombarded daily with information via the media. While it does inform, it does not equate with experience. People don’t see, smell, and feel the variety of characteristics and inhabitants that make up the very environments we are trying to protect. They are, as someone here commented earlier, armchair environmentalists; its all more virtual than real. They talk ‘green’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ because it makes them feel good. But when it comes down to push and shove, they don’t have the deep connection, the motivation, dedication and commitment of one whom has actually been there, or at the very least, experienced (seen, felt, smell) components of the environment. They have no real connection.
A common example is the people who read about the national parks, drive their cars in, take pictures from rolled down windows, or have their picture taken with the park’s landscape as a backdrop, and drive on through. Fewer get out of their vehicles and hike, explore, experience these places or glimpse the wildlife that inhabit them. (Eco-tourists)
One way to establish a connection is to bring the landscapes, environment and wildlife to them. Or host educational events which allow them to experience what we are trying to preserve. The Chihuahuan Desert Institute in SW Texas takes an active role in just this. Not only is it a center for desert research, but also a desert experience for the public. Members have also taken the desert (plants and animals) to schools in urban and rural areas to teach kids about desert climate, ecology and biodiversity.
Seems to me that over the last forty decades (I’m showing my age), education, policy formation and decision making have become a top-down catastrophe. It has failed, and will continue to fail. It’s time for grass-roots to take hold again and grow. Perhaps that could instill a sense of connection and stewardship that could change the tide of our current downfall.
Or maybe coyote is just chasing its tail.
I read your article in today’s Wildlife News, Brian. Outstanding.
Now if only we could do something about the wolf slaughter…......
(I dreamt the other night that I was hunting the hunters killing the wolves. I had no remorse.)
I agree macrobe, but also think (to borrow an over-used term by the environmentalists) “we need it all.” Education by going out into nature, by books, websites, museums, libraries, field trips, camping trips, virtual teaching. All of it, the Internet can be great educational tool to complement field experiences. I recently found a useful online field guide to biological soil crust lichens and mosses by USGS, and now I want to go into the desert and take a closer look at the living soils.
Thanks for the article on hex chrome in KCET. It was picked up by DWR’s “California Water News” on 2/23. Water News has a very wide circulation for those of us interested in water and wastewater.
Good to know! Thanks, Fred.
Oh boy. Isn’t this what it is to be human? To be able to consume energy and maintain ecological health? To once again irrationally want and try to have it both ways? What’s probably going to happen is that desert ecologies won’t be considered until a catastrophically shrunken world population subsists on a planet-wide desert.
As for me, I live a luddite’s life with shared computers and a box for a home, with three lights and a fan (oh, and a radiator.) Can I at least get a gold star for effort?
This is an enjoyable essay, as far as the bingo card. But it does hurt to think about how the Big Utilities will get to rape not only the consumer, but our last pristine eco-system -the deserts. Thank you for keeping your site going.
If the Powers that Be wanted to, they could put wind and solar on the roof tops of every home in California and other places where it is sunny so often. Wind turbines no longer take up any more space than an attic fan, and look pretty much the same. But it is all about helping the Big Polluting interests, and taking us away from nature.