Skip to main content

View Diary: Diane Feinstein needs to stop her war on solar (49 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yup, she desperately needs to be challanged (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Superpole, sphinxmoth

    Just another congressman who's gone rotten after too long in DC.  We need to really push a challenger against these people.  And she certainly did profit off of the Iraq War through her husband.

    She is protecting an ecosystem, and some would argue an important one.  There will be disruptions to the ecosystem even if it is planned extremely well.  The question is what does the ecosystem provide us versus another suitable location?  Some ecosystems can fix inorganic chemicals to usable forms, others are critical in nutrient and water cycling.  Some are simply aesthetically pleasing (often forgotten by utilitarians. What makes this location worse than another?  It has to go somewhere Sen. Feinstein.

    Rec'd as well.  We'll never have energy independence (or anything remotely close to that) is the representatives who supposedly support these measures scream NIMBY every time we begin to take serious steps to address the problem.

    •  Eminent Domain Time (0+ / 0-)

      I hope Obama sees what Feinstein is doing and has a word or two with her.. maybe that's what she's after in the first place.

      but seriously, the NIMBY issue applies directly to what Obama is talking about as far as renewable energy resources and high speed rail. land is needed, and too often local, state and federal authorities kill projects for no good reason.

      the feds probably just need to exercise eminent domain over swaths of the unused/unwanted Mojave, Arizona and Nevada deserts and get it over with.

      "Where is the change? What has changed? Clarify this to us." Ali Khamene'i

      by Superpole on Wed Mar 25, 2009 at 02:51:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not necessary (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Eminent domain isn't needed.  In these cases, the federal government or private landholders receive money and royalties from solar developers.  For solar projects on federal land, the taxpayer stands to make millions from private investment in solar power.  Barely anyone visits these lands Feinstein wants to close; however tourism may go up if solar is allowed!  So, in this economy, we can get tens of millions of dollars in royalties, lease payments, tourism, and taxes from solar projects that curb greenhouse gas emissions and pollution, or we can conserve all the land at a cost and discourage tourism.  Hmmm, what to do?

        For Virginia blog news, check out:

        by DanfromRaisingKaine on Wed Mar 25, 2009 at 04:32:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Good Points, But (0+ / 0-)

          I'm trying to save time-- and looking at this in the jobs creation context.

          all of these projects, i.e. high capacity wind turbines, solar farms, etc., have to go thru the permitting process which can take months, add in the lawsuits/NIMBY syndrome and you add months (and money) more.

          if the taxpayers can "make millions" as you say, from land deals for this- I'm all for it; I just don't want it to take five years.

          "Where is the change? What has changed? Clarify this to us." Ali Khamene'i

          by Superpole on Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 09:04:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  land deals is more immediate (0+ / 0-)

            Geothermal lease sales held in 2007 and 2008 raised a combined $62.9 million.  25% of that money went to the County Governments.  That money was issued to the Counties within months.  Now, actual project-related jobs may wait for permitting to be completed, but land deals can pay off immediate benefits.

            For Virginia blog news, check out:

            by DanfromRaisingKaine on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:32:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site