-
Is Kleiner Perkins Sorry It Ever Met Al Gore?
May 13, 2013 | 32 comments
-
America’s Oil Revival
February 8, 2013 | 146 comments
-
Want to Stop Violence? Start in Hollywood
January 21, 2013 | 26 comments
-
Brandon in the Basement
January 8, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Time for Some Ju-Jitsu
December 10, 2012 | 51 comments
The Energy Spectator
Obama’s Federal Land Grab
Enviros used to oppose any use of America’s federal lands. Now they want it to be the source of “renewable energy.” Welcome to America’s two economies.
Three weeks ago, Dan Henninger of the Wall Street Journal wrote about how under the Obama Administration the country is really splitting into two economies, one public, one private. More and more the government is trying to replace private markets in the decision of what gets built, when and how.
Little did he know. As if on cue, the Administration a week later announced it will be starting a full-scale initiative to build wind and solar projects on federal Western lands, with contributions coming from both the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Defense. The Pentagon’s contribution will be 16 million acres. In case you’re keeping score, that’s 25,000 square miles or the size of West Virginia. Who knew they owned that much? Yet the truth is, if you’re going to build wind and solar you’re going to need that much space because both are hugely dilute and can’t be scaled up except by occupying more land.
Although landowning and private property have been foundation of American democracy since the time of the Revolution, in fact there huge amounts of land still belong to the government — much more even than in a place such as the United Kingdom, where large tracts are still owned by “The Crown.” Things began to change in this country around the beginning of the 20th century. Before that, the Homestead Act, adopted under Abraham Lincoln in the midst of the Civil War, had put land west of the Mississippi in the hands of small farmers and property owners. Settlers were promised 160 acres if they lived on the land for five years and made improvements. As riverbeds lands were exhausted, the allotment was increased to 320 acres in 1909 to encourage dry land farming. With this acreage went the mineral rights.
After 1900, however, Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot became concerned that people were exploiting forest and mineral resources and decided to halt the giveaway. The National Forests were created in 1905 and after 1916 homesteaders were no longer given the mineral rights to their land. All the unclaimed lands were retained by the General Land Office, which merged with the Federal Grazing Service in 1946 to become the Bureau of Land Management. When the Homestead Act was finally terminated in 1934, it had granted 420,000 square miles or 1/10th of the United States into private hands. But the amount of land in the National Forest Service remains at 360,000 square miles, and the BLM retains another 400,000 square miles, meaning more than half the land west of the Mississippi is still owned by the federal government. On top of that, the BLM also retains the mineral rights to a remarkable 1.1 million square miles, about 30 percent of the entire U.S.
This continued federal ownership has created considerable conflict. In western logging areas, for instance, private ownership was originally granted to the railroads in a checkerboard pattern that prevented the accumulation of large contiguous territories. This pattern still exists and assures that any effort to develop forest or mineral resources must take on the federal government as a partner. The Forest Service was fairly cooperative in leasing forest lands until environmental groups gained control in the 1970s. Logging was then slowed and eventually brought to a halt in Oregon and Washington by the spotted owl decision. Federal ownership of oil and gas rights has proceeded in the same way. While leases were once granted at a fairly rapid pace, they have now slowed to a crawl and as the influence of environmentalists rises in the government. As has often been noted, natural gas fracking never would have gotten off the ground except that most of the reserves are the eastern half of the country where private ownership prevails.
Now the tables are turning. Whereas most of the pressure from environmental groups has been in preventing the development of Western lands, now these seemingly endless tracts are being regarded as a fertile field of dreams for environmentalists to carry on their experiments with wind and solar energy. Early this month, President Obama proudly announced seven major projects on Western lands. The largest will be a 3,000-MW-capacity wind farm covering 350 square miles of Wyoming. The others include a 75-square-mile wind farm in the Mojave Desert of Arizona and several-square-mile solar complexes in California, Arizona, and Nevada.
All these projects will suffer the intermittency problems that plague wind and solar generation everywhere. This intermittency will create surges and voltage drops that destabilize a grid. Some solar plants are now developing thermal storage that can carry them through a few hours of the night, but only this reduces their overall capacity by nearly one-half, so that instead of requiring 10 square miles of highly polished mirrors to generate 500 megawatts — the size of an average coal plant — it will take twenty. These projects will also require hundreds of miles of transmission lines to bring them to population centers. And the electricity they produce will be ridiculously expensive.
Yet all will move ahead because federal-and-state-sponsored renewable programs are being pursued without any regard for the economic consequences. The electricity they produce will be guaranteed a market at a price that makes them profitable, whatever it may be. As David Crane, CEO of NRG Energy, told the New York Times about California-sponsored solar project his company is building: “I have never seen anything that I have had to do in my 20 years in the power industry that involved less risk. It is just filling the desert with panels.”
So as Daniel Henninger suggests, we are indeed moving toward two separate energy economies. One will be based on market forces and economic efficiency. The other will be driven by ideological certainty. Renewable energy is the wave of the future, therefore we must pursue it at any price. There is little question as to which will make the greater contribution to the nation’s energy budget.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (38) | Leave a comment
More Articles by William Tucker
More Articles From The Energy Spectator
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/17/obamas-federal-land-grab
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Otis, my man!| 8.17.12 @ 7:48AM
The other irony here is the shere aesthetic hideousness of these massive wind farms, solar farms and transmission lines. Nothing despoils the wide open scenic landscape of the West like windmills and high power electric line towers.
I wonder if the Sierra club knows about this?
Indy| 8.17.12 @ 8:05AM
The Sierra Club is also silent on all the birds that are killed by these wind farms.
Zeppo| 8.17.12 @ 11:53AM
They also slaughter huge numbers of bats. See http://spectrum.ieee.org/energ.....t-problem. The article mentions that bat deaths in North America could lead to $3.27 billion in agricultural losses each year.
TLP| 8.17.12 @ 8:35PM
Let's remember where all of this stems from.
Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.
A Progressive Income Tax.
Confiscation of Inheritence. (Inheritence Tax)
Government Control of Property. (Eminent Domain)
Government Control of the Means of Production. (GM, Chrysler, The Drilling Moratoriam, the XL Pipeline, AIG, The EPA, The Energy and Agriculture Department, and The NLRB)
Government Control of Everybody's Health Care. (Obamacare)
Government Control of The Press, and The Media. (Self Explanatory)
Government Confiscation of the People's Guns. (Fast and Furious)
Any questions?
Von Mises Jr| 8.17.12 @ 8:05AM
We are NOT moving towards two economies, one private and one public. Look at this Agenda21 map and everywhere except the little black dots is intended to be public http://images.search.yahoo.com.....=yfp-t-701
Von Mises Jr| 8.17.12 @ 8:05AM
You have to be ignorant not to realize that all the oil, natural gas, coal, farm land and WATER are located on the land the US and UN elites want for themselves. If they have their way, you will live in a 700 ft "stack and pack" apartment working for one of their crony capitalist such as Buffet or Immelt and like a serf, you can keep about 10% for yourself. The high-speed rail is part of this plan that Obama and the boys love so much. This ain't rocket science to figure out.
scotchieguy| 8.17.12 @ 9:56AM
A question for you Von--what will become of the millions of homes in the suburbs that are on half-acre lots? My fear is the banks will take them over and subdivide them into apartments, but they are still miles away from town, and there simply isn't enough money to build that many light rail lines.
lost| 8.17.12 @ 11:36AM
Banks will not take them over, the government will take the land force people into the cities where they can be better controlled. Agenda 21 wants all parts of human life controlled and micromanaged
DRed| 8.17.12 @ 12:15PM
And you know all of this because of a non-binding UN action plan and a map cobbled together from a bunch of random sources by some Bircher moron. Like how Eisenhower was a secret communist agent part of the takeover of our government? And fluoride in the water was part of a communist plot? 50 years of being laughably wrong and counting-The John Birch Society.
Von Mises Jr| 8.17.12 @ 1:34PM
In New Jersey, the Democrats in the Senate and Assembly are trying to pass a Foreclosure Bill. It would authorize a $1B Bond Issue to be paid back by our kids in order to buy the foreclosed houses.
Then they would use them for "affordable housing" for drug addicts, sex offenders, ex-convicts (all like D'Red Communist). This will destroy the property values and they will fall into disrepair.
I suspect they would eventually bulldoze them like they are doing to Detroit.
They don't give a crap about the houses. The commies want the water and farm land. It is how they will water and feed their "bewildered herd."
DRed| 8.17.12 @ 1:50PM
Yes, because America doesn't produce enough food right now, that's why we need more farmland.
DRed| 8.17.12 @ 10:11AM
It sure ain't rocket science.
Truth to Power| 8.17.12 @ 11:40AM
It is adding and subtracting and your basic progressive just won't do it. Or can't. Forward to a wind powered Detroit.
Indy| 8.17.12 @ 8:11AM
Since I know A21 is a hot topic you monitor, are you aware of the Global Conservation Act of 2012? Sponsor in the Senate (S.3356 ) is Portman and the House Bill (HR 6038) sponsor is Rep. Jeff Fortenberry of NE, bills are in committee, please inform others, this needs to be shut down in committee and Portman needs to be exposed for driving this. I have not read all of the details but it is definitely A21 legislation.
Von Mises Jr| 8.17.12 @ 8:40AM
Christie is also still pushing an Executive Order in New Jersey for a Development and Redevelopment Plan that is Agenda21. The original Draft states "planning authority also takes place at levels above the State's Authority" and cites EPA, HUD and FTA. The TEA Party has much more work to do.
Thanks for the heads up. I know allot of people that will be interested in researching and fighting this power grab by the elites of both Parties.
Al Adab| 8.17.12 @ 9:23AM
Nothing, and certainly not honesty or philosophic consistency, must be allowed to get in the way of "doing the right thing".
What that means in practice of course is that the voters have no say when it comes to the enlightened mandarin class. The elites who are clearly our betters, know what we plebs need whether we like it or not.
Pecos Pete| 8.17.12 @ 9:42AM
It is "interesting" that the eco-nuts support windmills and solar panels that require great heaping gobs of minerals that have to be, horrors, mined from Mother Earth; and, which also require significant electrical energy to convert to those lovely towers of spinning killers and desert flowers of sun absorbing radiant energy.
Mike G| 8.17.12 @ 10:19AM
""I have never seen anything that I have had to do in my 20 years in the power industry that involved less risk. It is just filling the desert with panels.""
What happens to all the hardware in those panels after 25 years--or 50 years--however long the panel's lifespan is? Isn't that going to create the same pollution problems as dumping computers in landfills? Or (like most governmental ideas) has this not been thought through? I don't know the answer, I'm just wondering out loud...
lost| 8.17.12 @ 11:43AM
Those panels in the desert will not last 25 years. I would venture a guess that within 10 years they will have started to replace then. Wind blown sand will reduce the efficiency of the panels in sort order.
sotto voce| 8.20.12 @ 3:22PM
Your power-industry guy may not be assuming any risk by blanketing the desert with solar panels, but the real question is what's he doing to the desert environment? The desert is not a disposable wasteland, it's a beautiful and delicately balanced ecosystem.
c. j. acworth| 8.17.12 @ 10:27AM
"....a 3,000 megawatt capacity windfarm covering 350 square miles of Wyoming."
Thats 3,000MW CAPACITY. If the usual expectations are met, it will put out mabey 20% of that on average, or about 600 megawatts if we're lucky. That is roughly the output of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear plant which sits across the river from me, and sure as hell doesn't take up 350 sq. mi.
MelvinNC| 8.17.12 @ 10:54AM
Here in North Carolina the Marines built three very expansive and expensive solar farms. The militant enviros from the feds and local yocals from North Carolina were prancing around and wetting themselves in organsmic joy on the term, "Sustainable and renewable energy.
But guess what they had to do to accomplish this? Clear cut and level acres and acres of forest that was habitat to I don't know how many four legged forest dwellers.
There was no, "Wait a darn minute," lawsuit from a militant environmental group because of some bug, or bacteria that is on the governments, "Endangered Species or protected Act."
Nope, the militant Enviros just went in with bulldozers and went buck wild.
I not a militant environmentalist, but I do firmly believe, if ya don't have to cut the trees down, then down cut them down, just leave em, critters got to live somewhere.
What galls me is the outright hypocrisy of the Left. Loggers can't cut the trees down and replant, but the enviros can install acres and acres of glass that kills everything underneath because sunlight can't get through. F-ing militant environmentalist Azzholes.
Houdini| 8.17.12 @ 11:33AM
Sit down, shut up and eat your Soylent Green.
Al Adab| 8.17.12 @ 3:40PM
Recycling is a good thing and "green" is what we want, yes?
RJ| 8.17.12 @ 12:04PM
Its time to re-energize the sagebrush revolt of the 1970s. There is no way the federal government should own so much land. In case of some of the Western states, if memory serves me correctly, is it well over 70%.
Petronius| 8.17.12 @ 12:22PM
Except for the National Parks and military posts all land should be Privately Owned. But nooooo. They want "perfection" defined as life without Any responsibility. Wind and solar must succeed so electric utilities can be shut down, so the hippies do not have to go to WORK to pay the power bill. Now do you foolish traditional Adults understand what the Real political and social goal of the left is?
chuck| 8.18.12 @ 7:47AM
Almost agree. The National Parks should be owned by the states in which they reside. Arizona should own the Grand Canyon, California should own Yosemite, etc. Military bases should be leased by the feds from the states. The states would have to compete for the military bases according to cost.
The Federal government should own no land outside of the District of Columbia.
RJ| 8.18.12 @ 2:51PM
I would like to see much of the District of Columbia (the residential areas) returned to Maryland and end the discussion that it should become the 51st state.
Conservative Bob| 8.17.12 @ 2:10PM
We have a debt that is out of control. The federal government owns vast tracks of land. Seems to me there is a solution implied there that needs further consideration.
Do the feds pay property tax to the states where they own land?
Al Adab| 8.17.12 @ 3:39PM
Of course they pay no taxes, but think of the money sales or leases of those lands could bring in to pay down the debt.
cicero| 8.17.12 @ 3:32PM
These are the same guys that won't let us establish a lateral drilling system on a few acres in the ANWAR. However, the great thing about a democracy is that the people get what they ask for. They have to vote these fools in. They have to beg to be controlled. They stand by when these fools confirm Federal judges that issue rediculous opinions siding with the radical enviros, because they are too stupid to know what is reality and what is not. We have allowed our government to take over our responsibilities. It was so easy. Don't bother me with taking care of myself, my family, my neighbors, my country. I have more inportant things to look after - like who is going to win a sporting event; like who is going to be the next american idol; like anything that means nothing. We have met the enemy, and it is us.
Appleby| 8.17.12 @ 3:38PM
Who's going to guard this stuff? Once the Ghetto Crowd finds out that nobody's watching it, they'll be out there on stolen motorbikes spray painting, carving up, smashing and disassembling the whole shooting match. Oh and shooting holes in it. They'll probably run tours for the purpose.
Rifleman| 8.17.12 @ 11:42PM
As soon as Romney is sworn in he needs to kill these plans- pronto! It takes miles & miles of windmills to create much energy. Oh, ask the tree-hugers if they want the noisy things on or near their property. When the wind isn't blowing enough other forms of energy are needed to turn the things. They kill thousands of poor birds every year. They are a waste- as is solar.
Ann Banisher| 8.18.12 @ 12:11PM
There are 3 problems with wind power.
1. In a best case scenario, wind is a net drain on the treasury. The construction must be subsidized with tax dollars, and the energy it generates provides no revenue to the government. Oil/gas provides billions in tax revenue in the form of excise taxes, lease fees, and oil company profits.
2. Wind is an unreliable source of energy, which means you must always have a back up (carbon based) source of power available so not only do the upfront costs double, the wear on the back up system is greater because of the starting & stopping (think of stop and go traffic wear on you engine vs setting your car on cruise control).
3. The source of energy may be clean, but the damage to the environment both to extract the materials (China is the dumping ground for all the heavy metals required for the turbines) as well as the destruction of the vast acreage required to generate a minute amount of energy some of the time and then you must build transmission lines to deliver the power to where it is needed, because these wind farms are generally not near where people are.
If you want to spend money on renewable energy, the best system is the tax credits for solar on new and existing homes & business. It may have similar problems with 1 & 2, but at least the energy generated is where it is being used, doesn't need new infrastructure, and replaces peak energy costs, which are always more expensive, making it at least more feasible.
Ann Banisher| 8.18.12 @ 12:17PM
On a similar note, I am an architect in SoCal who was self employed for 15 yrs, working on relatively small, private developer driven projects. All of these projects generated cash flow to the local, state & federal budgets thru developer fees, water/sewer fees, property tax revenue increase, sales tax if retail, TOT tax if hotel, school fees if residential. One $8M hotel paid $1.5M in fees to build & will generate $1M per year in recurring fees & taxes. I now work as an employee for a company and have been responsible for the design of $500B of construction in the last year on Federal projects. While that keeps us busy, it generates zero dollars in fees and tax revenue to the state & local treasury. This is the fallacy behind the federal stimulus. They are just empty calories.
KamilBourne13| 8.18.12 @ 3:01PM
just as Adam implied I'm startled that anybody can make $7197 in a few weeks on the computer. did you read this web link EarlyRich(dot)com
JGW| 8.19.12 @ 10:54AM
On the bright side.
At least two new job titles will be added to the Dept. of Labors Dictionary of Occupational Titles.
Solar Panel Cleaning Maintenance Operator
( must be able to use a Sqeegee)
Avian Biomass Collector
( must be handy with a trash bag)
These will all be Federal Employess and SEIU members. Green card holders have priority.
sotto voce| 8.20.12 @ 3:16PM
I recently drove to Palm Springs after not visiting the area for a few years. The windmills lining both sides of Interstate 10 have multiplied exponentially and their visual pollution is ruining the otherwise stunning desert views. Mt. San Jacinto rises dramatically on your right as you travel east, but the desert floor at its base is marred by acres of churning beasts. Why do liberals, who profess to love the natural environment and claim to be its protector, remain unmoved by the damaging effects of wind and solar installations? Ugliness, the death and destruction of animal, bird and plant habitats are apparently unimportant in the larger scheme of taxpayer-funded cronyism.