“Green” Energy Means Mass Destruction of Open Space

I have been fighting for open space and wilderness since I was 15 years old, when I testified at my first Congressional hearing in support of a wilderness area in Utah. I have also worked as a wilderness ranger for the US Forest Service.

“Green energy” has very low energy density, so it necessarily involves destruction of huge areas of open space and thus is very destructive to wildlife and the environment.

ScreenHunter_448 Jun. 13 07.48

By contrast, coal has very high energy density, and thus is much less destructive the environment.

ScreenHunter_449 Jun. 13 07.50

The global warming scam is being used to make environmentalists self-destruct.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to “Green” Energy Means Mass Destruction of Open Space

  1. Tel says:

    The global warming scam is being used to make environmentalists self-destruct.

    Is that a good or a bad thing? I don’t know anymore.

    I think someone else waved the noose and the environmentalists stuck their own head in. The noose was not global warming, it was money and convenient self-confirmation of the belief that technology is evil, a comfortable lifestyle is evil, and SUV drivers are annoying pricks.

    Be very careful any time you meet someone who can tell you exactly what you want to hear.

  2. Jeffk says:

    It’s important to remember that environmentalism has a schism of two cults, one of which is a false prophesy and will self-destruct like you say. The misanthropic sect believes anything humans do is harmful to nature, even when the big picture proves otherwise. Such as high density urban living, called “condos” by greentards, which in fact is the greenest lifestyle despite the concentration of people (greentards often live in the countryside with septic tanks leaking in the watershed and drive into town and back scaring wildlife to death).
    On the good side are the conservation-environmentalists. Those who set aside nature while staying in the cities, to visit parks now and then, leaving nature alone. Teddy Roosevelt would understand.

  3. B says:

    It’s the use of excuses to achieve political goals.

    Cheap energy is the way to a better life and getting out of poverty. Cheap energy gives people the time to learn things. Cheap energy allows people to have the time to challenge the political leadership. Cheap energy makes people less controllable. Cheap energy means less ability to tell people how to live. The political class wants control. But how will it achieve it, and/or maintain it when the world already has cheap energy for so many and many more are seeking to achieve it?

    It needs an excuse. What excuse has been used for thousands of years? Climate. Weather. If you don’t sacrifice and obey the spring rains won’t come and the crops won’t grow and you’ll starve. If you don’t sacrifice and obey the snake god will eat the sun and you’ll freeze and starve.

    The environment is an excuse to greatly increase the cost and access to energy. The cost and access to energy is one of the methods of political control. It doesn’t matter what actually happens to the environment.

  4. Gail Combs says:

    I quit using the word environmentalist and switched to the word conservationist.

    The other misused word that makes my blood boil is “Sustainable” That used to mean farming in such a manner that the land was ‘conserved’ and kept in good health for the next generation. Now the word has been co-opted to mean all sorts of nasty things.

    The Sociopathic elite, now calling themselves “progressives” have a nasty habit of taking a word with good emotions attached and using it for their own ends. In other words they LIE!

    Here is another example that might prove useful History of Democrat Racism

    All too easily, America has fallen into the posture of believing racism is solely the property of Republicans and Conservatives. The truth is much different…

    She has a long list of links like: Martin Luther King a Republican?
    So it is worth bookmarking this web page.

  5. Dom says:

    And where are all the protestors? The take sabbaticals when a liberal is in office; if they do protest, they protest for the invisible things like income and wealth (The occupy Wallstreet crowd).

    Driving across the country, it is obvious how the windmills adversely affect the landscape so-much more than oil; with the one exception of strip-mining.

    Damn liberals and their idolatrous “myopia”!

    The good news is that all the windmills will one-day be an integral component of fossil fuel.

    Ha ha ha ha

    • Gail Combs says:

      “…Driving across the country, it is obvious how the windmills adversely affect the landscape so-much more than oil; with the one exception of strip-mining….”
      And even the strip mining is not as bad since the companies now have to curb pollution and restore the area creating lakes and other nice areas. (Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977)

      Strip mining at least does not kill off the local raptor and bat population either.

      I have done a lot of caving and ridge walking in West Virgina before and after that 1977 law went into effect and there has been a major improvement. Some where I have a picture taken of a friend standing on a ridge with strip mining devastation behind him. It was taken in 1974. (Back then I was a member of Greenpeace, Sierra Club and The Nature Conservancy.)

  6. Brad says:

    I have family that live in the Panhandle of Texas. Massive wind farms have been installed up there just North and East of Amarillo. They are an eye sore. But, land owners can get paid up to $15,000 a year for each turbine on their property depending on the size of the turbine. Of course that money comes from Tax payers and not from the Wind Farms making money. For the farmers, they see it as a cash cow and will not turn it down.

  7. Dan Kurt says:

    re: “The global warming scam is being used to make environmentalists self-destruct.” SG

    What? They are not self-destructing. They have the Media in their pocket. They are winning. Coal power is being killed as you write. Atomic Energy has been stalled. Democrat power has been guaranteed in perpetuity by transforming a White nation (90%) to a > 50 to 60% Non-White <85 mean IQ 3rd World Multi Lingual Balkanized Pseudo-nation ripe for governing by future Obamas. Just look at California and its transformation into Mexifornia: Democrat forever. That energy will be in short supply is of no matter to the Democrats since they will have the unchallenged political power to control the stupid who will continue to vote for them as long as they get their Rice and Beans as well as the rhetoric of equality.

    Dan Kurt

  8. darrylb says:

    Thanks for this post, I have not thought of all this from this perspective.

    Another ironic fact is that the increase in CO2 is MAKING THE WORLD GO GREEN.!
    CO2, and elixir for life, is increasing the plant life in the world and is a boon to many things including agriculture. Satellite photos show a significant green increase particularly in semi-arid areas. As I recall, Ryan Maue (spelling?) a plant fertilization expert stated there was a 42% increase. .

  9. There’s a huge windfarm south of Abilene, TX. It’s called the Roscoe Wind farm, 634 turbines on 100,000 acres per Wikipedia. That’s 150 acres per turbine, meaning you could put 300 homes in the space of 1 turbine.

    I could be wrong, but the reason they place wind turbines so far apart is so they don’t affect the wind so much that the next turbine downwind produces less energy.

    I’d like to see an analysis done of wind energy’s spatial coefficiency. What I mean is, how many wind turbines operating at max efficiency (~1 turbine per 150 acres) does it take to power 150 acres of residential, commercial, and industrial property. I’m guessing more than 1.

    • _Jim says:

      Some of those turbines out near Abilene are ‘visible’ on the KDYX WSR-88D “NEXRAD” too. Day and night, Night and day.

      See the little dots to the left of the RADAR site (the little blanked-out disk), about halfway to the west county border?


      I used Google Earth to verify turbines (and service roads et al) exist at the place where these ‘returns’ are seen a few months back (just in case anybody is wondering) … a similar case existed to the west of the KFDR site (at least it used to; I think the turbines are showing up better on the KDYX site attm.)


      • Brad says:

        The same holds true for the wind farms near Amarillo. They can be seen as “rain” on radar when there is not a cloud in the sky.

        • _Jim says:

          Not quite as dramatic as those that show up on the Dyess KDYX WSR-88D NEXRAD.

          Here’s the Amarillo KAMA WSR-88D NEXRAD, click on the center right-facing arrow to activate the RADAR imagery ‘loop’. There are a few dots and series of much lighter returns showing from NNE to roughly NE from the KAMA RADAR site.


          Much more worthy of note is something close-in to the RADAR site that blocks a ‘beam’ to the SE .. have never looked at Google Earth to see what that might be. (Note the dark radial off to the SE, that is the direction of the blockage)

          I would not say (attm) that it looks like ‘rain’ either; I have never seen ‘rain’ that specular (small, isolated individual dots) on a display.


        • Brad says:

          Ah, I was looking at it from Weatherunderground Wundermap.

  10. Chuck says:

    It doesn’t matter to the idiot progressive. NM had their primaries last week, there was one idiot democrat who ran on this very issue. His constant and very annoying radio adds said “we have lots of open space in NM that we can use to generate clean and renewable energy”. I thought to myself, the last thing I want to see when I go riding/camping/hiking are windmills or solar farms. I just want to be away from everything and enjoy nature.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Reread what Jeffk says @ June 13, 2014 at 12:35 pm

      The serfs are not allowed to muck-up mother nature by go riding/camping/hiking, being away from everything and enjoying nature.

      Instead we are to be relegated to our 14ft X 14ft Sustainable Apartments, our bike paths and city “green spaces” while the trails and roads in out national parks are ripped out, called “wildlife corridors” and made off limits. It is already happening.

      Stewards of the Sequoia 2013
      Many of the areas shown on The Wildland Project maps in RED, as off limits to human use, already have significantly reduced public access and no management or resource harvesting through: Wilderness, Critical Habitat and Roadless Areas. YELLOW Areas are areas of Highly regulated Use where hiking may be allowed, but no homes. Only GREEN areas will allow housing….

      Is your home in a YELLOW Area, where housing will ultimately be prohibited through increased taxation and impossible regulations such as updating your home to current building code standards or being within a few miles of a fire/police station? Could your local rural fire or police station be closed due to lack of funding making all homes in your area nonconforming and uninsurable? [Just had a call this week from our insurance agent telling us we are now “uninsurable” – we are in a red zone]

      The community of Lake Isabella and the entire Kern River Valley are shown as YELLOW or RED which means you will not be allowed to live there….

      This is what the UN Biodiversity treaty is all about. It was defeated in Congress at the 11th hour but that did not stop it. Instead it is being implemented piecemeal just like Obama and the EPA are going around Congress.

      The President’s Council on Sustainable Developmentwas created by President Clinton in 1993, creating a method to implement The Wildlands project through Specific Plans in communities across the nation.” Bills and Laws

      The Biodiversity Map. Green areas are where humans are allowed red areas are no access, yellow is buffer zones. Of course the elite like Maurice Strong, Ted Turner and George Soros get to keep their large land holdings. It is the serfs that are to be contained.

      General info: http://nwri.org/?s=wildlands+map&search=Search

      The people behind the wildlands projects: http://www.undueinfluence.com/wildlands_disambiguation.htm

  11. Gail Combs says:

    I keep wondering what happens when a really big swarm of tornadoes hits. In Indiana I saw straw driven through electric poles. In Alabama (ridge walking looking for caves again) I saw a tornado take out a mobile home park in the valley below us.

    Tornado vs. Turbines: Wind Farm Mania

  12. gallopingcamel says:

    It may be callous of me but I don’t have a problem with self-destructing environmentalists.

    It only becomes a problem when they try to drag me along with them.

  13. Larry Fields says:

    Gail Combs says:
    June 13, 2014 at 2:15 pm
    “I quit using the word environmentalist and switched to the word conservationist.”

    You’re spot-on, Gail. I consider myself to be a Conservationist. I’m in favor of things like National Parks, National Forests, clean water, and saving the Giant Panda.

    21st Century Environmentalists pay lip service to these things. But in their heart of hearts, they tend to be useful idiots at the bottom of the ‘food chain’, and misanthropes near the top. Hence the CAGW scam, which is really about economic sabotage, and about increasing the death rates of poor people during cold Winters, which is already happening in Britain.

    A few years ago, the eco-loonies in Denmark wanted to put up bird-choppers in Thy National Park, in order to ‘save the planet’. Environmentalism vs the environment. Hmm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s