
Vacant-land mythology impedes serious energy discussions - jseliger
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/430992-vacant-land-mythology-impedes-serious-energy-discussions
======
debatem1
What? Nobody believes that you can just saddle up, head to Montana, and
homestead yourself a wind farm. (It'd be a cool sci-fi setting, though).

People do think that there are vast areas of cheap and lightly utilized land
outside of the urban corridors which could produce more money with solar,
wind, etc than they do today. They believe this because it is 100% correct,
and would be correct whether you were talking about renewable energy or any
other light industry.

The author seems to think that because this land is used at all and not free
solar etc cannot go there, which is a baffling claim to me on both points.

~~~
jtr1
Worth noting the author’s fellowship at the Manhattan Institute. This is
essentially paid content from a very well-funded outfit with pretty clear
ideological objectives.

------
maxander
Well, yes, NIMBYism is a thing. But most oil and gas operations, while they
take up less space, are more than toxic and smelly enough to make up the
difference- and pipelines are regularly routed through public lands, skirting
highly populated zones, in the face of massive public opposition. The reason
those get built where renewables don't is simply that the oil industry is
_massive_ and knows how to work the necessary politics.

The renewable industry will need cultivate its clout, and learn to work the
system just like the oil players have- and then, NIMBYism and lack of space
will just mysteriously cease to be problems.

------
shereadsthenews
Is "nearly ten square miles" supposed to be a lot? The Black Thunder coal mine
occupies a lot more land than that and the railroads needed for its 25 trains
per day of coal occupy more space than any HVDC transmission system. The fact
is we have more than enough free space for all the solar and wind America
needs. Put PV all over Edwards AFB and you'd supply a substantial fraction of
all of it.

By the way the USA has over 2 billion parking spaces. Somehow we find the
space for what we value.

------
_justinfunk
Maybe he has a point to make. But he doesn't make it very well in this opinion
piece.

I am currently traveling through the south-western, and mountain-west states.
(Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, etc).

Vacant land is not a myth.

------
empath75
Author is a climate change denialist and the institute he works for is funded
by the Koch brothers and Exxon mobile.

~~~
HarryHirsch
Well, yes, it's understandable why traditional energy companies have all sorts
of government support including eminent domain and why he wouldn't wish that
those protections extend to the competition in the renewable sector.

~~~
minikites
Why is that understandable?

~~~
HarryHirsch
Energy is a matter of national security and a source of big money, it's easy
to see why the government would protect these interests against the pesky
locals.

~~~
whatislovecraft
What do you mean? I really don't understand the point you are trying to make.
Energy is a matter of national security primarily because our energy sources
and distribution are destroying our own country. Quickly, too. Miami will not
recognizably exist for the lifetime of the kids growing up in it now.

It is the purpose of the government to serve and protect those "pesky locals"
(ew...do you really call your fellow people 'pesky' who want a better world
for you?) and the best way the government can do that is to shut down
oil/coal/polluting technologies and move to renewables as fast as possible.

~~~
cat199
> Energy is a matter of national security primarily because our energy sources
> and distribution are destroying our own country.

Really?

Then how come Saudi's are "nice good guys" and Iranians are "scary bad guys",
when neither is an 'enlightened' western-style democracy?

truth is a bit more complicated i'm afraid.

see also: Clash, The. "Rock the Casbah", CBS Records, 1982.

~~~
whatislovecraft
> Really?

Yes, really.

> Then how come Saudi's are "nice good guys"

I have never heard that in my life. Saudi is one of the scariest places on
Earth to me, I don't see anything nice or good there, and neither does anyone
I know. What do you mean?

> Iranians are "scary bad guys"

I've never heard this either??

What on Earth does any of this have to do with my post?

~~~
cat199
> I have never heard that in my life.

check us foreign policy. it's pretty clear.

>Saudi is one of the scariest places on Earth to me, I don't see anything nice
or good there, and neither does anyone I know.

hey great, your opinion here doesn't matter. you were commenting on national
security and energy policy, which may or may not reflect your personal
opinions.

> What on Earth does any of this have to do with my post?

that energy policy is also related to geopolitical concerns and protecting
strategic interests in other areas (e.g. financial system / allegiances in
other areas / petrodollars, etc) and, i posit, not simply "because our energy
sources and distribution are destroying our own country" as you claim

------
jdietrich
From a British perspective, this argument seems utterly absurd. We generate
almost twice as much of our electricity using renewable sources, but our
population density is eight times higher. If we can find the land to
accommodate wind turbines, so can you. There are a heck of a lot of rooftops
that don't currently have solar panels on them.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_production_from_renewable_sources)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density)

~~~
bwanab
You British also have a history of pulling together when times get tough.
Maybe it's because of our lack of density, or maybe it's just the people who
up and moved here, but as Churchill supposedly said: “Americans can always be
trusted to do the right thing, once all other possibilities have been
exhausted.”

------
minikites
>They also are concerned about impacts to property values.

What's going to happen to your property values when climate change renders
your region uninhabitable?

~~~
gus_massa
The expected change for the next hundred years is only a few degrees, it will
not make the region uninhabitable this century. People doesn't care too much
about the price of the property in a few centuries.

~~~
dwaltrip
The few degrees is a global average. It won't be evenly distributed, so some
areas will suffer more from rising temperatures.

~~~
gus_massa
I agree, but for this particular area I think that the estimation is nor far
away from the average.

------
newnewpdro
There's obviously some amount of truth to this considering we recently
discussed [1] the largest county in the USA (San Bernardino) restricting
large-scale solar and wind farm projects.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19277653](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19277653)

------
cat199
of course 'the hill' blames the backwards people in flyover states in need of
superior bicoastal enlightenment for resisting the change to renewables,
rather than looking for the lobbyists hiding out in their own full-of-hot-air
backyard..

reality is probably some combination of both, minus the whole false-
superiority bicoastal enlightenment thing..

