Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
BLM Reverses Solar Moratorium in 6 Western States
planetsave.com — The Bureau of Land Management has reversed it ’s 22 month moratorium on new applications for solar power development on public lands.
sustainablogger- 545 diggs
- digg it
- DavidtheDuke, on 07/02/2008, -2/+26*cue Cheney groan*
- gn0stik, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Go and do a search, and see how those BLM guys got their jobs.
- MacEnvy, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4The top people are Presidential appointments that are approved by Congress ... but that's exactly the point, don't you think? They were holding up the process for new applications but they were forced to change their policy after public outcry.
Which makes Cheney groan. - VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1News today has been depressing enough.
I already know how they got their jobs without even checking.
- MacEnvy, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4The top people are Presidential appointments that are approved by Congress ... but that's exactly the point, don't you think? They were holding up the process for new applications but they were forced to change their policy after public outcry.
- gn0stik, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Go and do a search, and see how those BLM guys got their jobs.
- SoyJames, on 07/02/2008, -5/+6Flip floppers.
- phreak79, on 07/03/2008, -1/+20Fantastic news.
- gavinhudson, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5Indeed.
- zyl0x, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3Good news on Digg? A cold day in hell, indeed.
- neognostic, on 07/03/2008, -2/+26Wait a minute, a Bush Administration department doing the right thing for the first time in 8 years? Something is fishy here.
- Fratz, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6Maybe they're predicting a Democratic president and are acting accordingly to save their jobs.
- biotch, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Agreed, thats the best thing I could think of. Regardless, it is amazing when the gov. does one thing right these days. Ive gotten used to expecting the exact opposite of the right thing to happen.
- Brettm247, on 07/03/2008, -2/+0A Bush Administration Department? How is the Bureau of Land Management a Bush Administration Department? They are suppose to protect lands! Conservation. A field of solar panels is just like a Wal Mart parking lot, no wonder they had a moratorium.
- biotch, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Dont be so naive.... What would you say the 80 million sq. miles of land dedicated, under the BLM, to oil production looks like?
How is the BLM a Bush admin department?.... ummm maybe the fact that Bush appoints its officials?
- biotch, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Dont be so naive.... What would you say the 80 million sq. miles of land dedicated, under the BLM, to oil production looks like?
- Fratz, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6Maybe they're predicting a Democratic president and are acting accordingly to save their jobs.
- granolajoe, on 07/03/2008, -1/+8I'm glad that at least six states have people at the BLM with a sense of integrity.
- billbugger, on 07/03/2008, -1/+12why did they place a moratorium in the first place?
- kilt42, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5to study the effects of large solar plants on the animals and plants in the ecosystem.
- MacEnvy, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5He asked why they did it, not the lame excuse they made up for doing it :)
- nafai, on 07/03/2008, -3/+16I'm sure it's because a cheap, abundant energy supply would hinder oil profits.
- hansolo, on 07/03/2008, -1/+7Coal.
Not much oil goes to our electrical production - I think around 5%.
So you can bet it's the coal and nuclear interests that are scared of the solar/wind progression UNLESS they have a big stake in it. - Tenlow, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6Mister solo, cheap electricity would help electric cars get off the ground as well as help people heat their homes. If cheap electric heaters become less expensive than heating oil, you know people are going to make the switch. I know it's not the end all be all answer, but there are profits to be had keeping oil the dominant resource.
Right now, the United States is in a period where we need all the help we can get.
- hansolo, on 07/03/2008, -1/+7Coal.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5They work for Bush. We borrow $1,000,000,000 per day to import foreign oil. There is a lot of money behind keeping America inefficient. About $850 million a year (1 day expense) goes to lobbyists, shills, bloggers and such to keep us hooked. Some of that means cronies in little government offices who do anything to stand in the way of progress, so that one day they can be promoted to working for the companies that they helped.
Next question.
- kilt42, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5to study the effects of large solar plants on the animals and plants in the ecosystem.
- AnonthePyro, on 07/03/2008, -1/+9Good. Solar Energy FTW.
- regeya, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4WOOHOO!
- Dszerox, on 07/03/2008, -2/+9What about the environmental impact of NOT starting a solar program?
- MrMarket18, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2thank god
- OffPiste, on 07/03/2008, -6/+2A Cesna 172, and a bucket of marbles........
Lights out!!!!!!!- Buttercup, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5most high-end solar cells for home use are rated to withstand golf-ball sized hail... i dont think a few marbles are going to do much.
- OffPiste, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Someone needs to go back to HS physics. Glass has a much higher density than water.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Oh, I thought he was talking about attacking a convention of Clowns.
Try banana peels. They are required to trip on them due to the clown-code they all sign.
- Buttercup, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5most high-end solar cells for home use are rated to withstand golf-ball sized hail... i dont think a few marbles are going to do much.
- liljay2k, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4I'm glad this post made it to the frontpage, I was wondering about this since last week when they paused.
- Thrilltone, on 07/03/2008, -2/+14So, instead of outright banning it for 2 years, they will "continue to accept applications", which they can then stonewall in a much quieter manner, in their traitorous mission to help the Oil and Nuclear industries squash all competition.
- gn0stik, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Reversing the moratorium means the current projects are not being stonewalled. If anything this will light a fire under the asses of those managing those projects. Now, they can stonewall applications, but not projects that have already been approved.
- Kanele, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0"Now, they can stonewall applications, but not projects that have already been approved. "
exactly what they'll do. Makes planet buttseks less noisy.
- Kanele, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0"Now, they can stonewall applications, but not projects that have already been approved. "
- gn0stik, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Reversing the moratorium means the current projects are not being stonewalled. If anything this will light a fire under the asses of those managing those projects. Now, they can stonewall applications, but not projects that have already been approved.
- lionelmandrake, on 07/03/2008, -10/+3Yeah right, cover the landscape with inefficient, technically obsolete solar electric boondoggle systems that are established for the purpose of collecting tax credits, not necessarily for SERIOUS power generation. Gents, the technology on this is now moving so fast (in terms for Dollars/Euros per watt and more importantly in terms of milliwatts per cm squared) that the wholesale plastering of public lands with outdated junk seems ever dubious to me. It would be "nice" someday to have an administration with a fully integrated and technically competent plan. My viewing of "Who killed the electric car?" has easily convinced me that such integrated intelligence is sadly lacking in this current US administration. Interesting that McCain has made battery development and nuclear a "plank" in his platform. Solar vs. Nuclear? Solar has no rational chance.
- Tenlow, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Well I'd rather cover the landscape with inefficient technically obsolete solar crap that can simply be thrown away or recycled when we're done with it rather than using something that going to create a storage problem for millions of years. I think nuclear technology is great, but comparing it to solar as the "clean" alternative is well, just plain wrong. Solar does not produce any useless radioactive byproducts. Nothing nuclear power can do will ever surpass that simple fact.
- philhatesyou, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1A solar panel may have relatively little in the way of waste product at the end of it's lifetime, but that's because it's all generated at the beginning. PV waste is chemical, and there's far more chemical waste from solar cells than there is nuclear waste from a nuclear plant, especially if breeder reactors and the like are used similar to the way things are done in France. Additionally, nuclear power doesn't generate waste products that are a storage problem for millions of years. That's an absurd fiction.
- Tenlow, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1So what do we do with the nuclear waste? Eat it with some macaroons? You can improve the manufacturing process of solar cells to the point where there is not a toxic byproduct, but you can't improve nuclear reactors to not be radioactive.
- pentalive, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2The installation down near Barstow CA is not a PV, it's a Solar heated boiler running a turbine.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4How does a tax credit help you if your business is using something so inefficient that it can't make you money?
You really have to go a long way to make a conspiracy out of efforts to use Solar Power -- I can respect the effort, but not the motivation.
- Tenlow, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Well I'd rather cover the landscape with inefficient technically obsolete solar crap that can simply be thrown away or recycled when we're done with it rather than using something that going to create a storage problem for millions of years. I think nuclear technology is great, but comparing it to solar as the "clean" alternative is well, just plain wrong. Solar does not produce any useless radioactive byproducts. Nothing nuclear power can do will ever surpass that simple fact.
- Treoinmypocket, on 07/03/2008, -9/+4So what's the difference between ***** up public lands with fossil fuel/nuclear plants of one kind or another vs ***** them up with solar panel farms?
- zephc, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3I'm curious what sorts of environmental impact the BLM (and you) think that solar farms will have on the environment, compared to fossil fuels plants, etc? The really large one to be built in California will be 640 acres, which is 1 square mile. That's pretty big, but considering it emits nothing, and doesn't pollute any of the surrounding area, i think it is a fair tradeoff. The biggest impact I can see if displacing the indigenous critters and plants to that 1 square mile area.
- Brettm247, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0How about a Nuclear Facility that can be built on like 10 acres and doesn't emit anything?
- philhatesyou, on 07/03/2008, -0/+11 square mile for 80 megawatts? Surely you're joking. US Generating capacity was 1,089,807 megawatts as of 2007. Let's do some simple math here:
1,089,807 MW * 1mile^2/(80 MW) = 13622.6 mile^2
Size of Maryland: 12,407 mile^2
Right. Covering all of that land in Silicon and Steel would be great for the environment. Right?
- VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4Gee, what is the difference between the hole you use to put food into your body, and the one it comes out of?
Somethings don't really need explaining, do they?
One takes 10 years to build, and 10 years more to recoup the expense of building it. And is a dangerous hazard for 10,000 more years after its short life is over. It also, is insured by the government, because no private insurance agency could deal with the liability issues.
Now you guess which energy solution I'm talking about.- philhatesyou, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1You really honestly believe all of that? Seriously, how ***** dumb can you get? First off, the issue of nuclear waste disposal has been taken care of, it's called Yucca Mountain. No one gives a damn whether you like it or not, the geologists say it'll be fine, and they, as opposed to you, know what they're talking about.
Second, nuclear waste isn't a dangerous hazard for 10,000 more years after use. Once again, your feelings on the issue don't matter, facts govern, and the facts say that you're full of horse *****. For example, see http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Developm ...
- philhatesyou, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1You really honestly believe all of that? Seriously, how ***** dumb can you get? First off, the issue of nuclear waste disposal has been taken care of, it's called Yucca Mountain. No one gives a damn whether you like it or not, the geologists say it'll be fine, and they, as opposed to you, know what they're talking about.
- Treoinmypocket, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1hahaa - I didn't say ***** up the environment, I said ***** up public lands.
It is a huge farm of mirrors. What? All the prcious little snail darters, spotted owls, etc. can be displaced for this eyesore but not for logging, oil, coal, strip mining, etc.?
Oh I see. It isn't that you care about the precious little animals or keeping the lands pristine...its HOW you ***** them up that matters. - Brettm247, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0Lol i cannot believe Treoinmypocket has so many negative diggs. Lol after all he has a valid point. Epically if a Nuclear facility is clean and takes up less room that an array of solar panels. I always hated Digg too many idiots.
- zephc, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3I'm curious what sorts of environmental impact the BLM (and you) think that solar farms will have on the environment, compared to fossil fuels plants, etc? The really large one to be built in California will be 640 acres, which is 1 square mile. That's pretty big, but considering it emits nothing, and doesn't pollute any of the surrounding area, i think it is a fair tradeoff. The biggest impact I can see if displacing the indigenous critters and plants to that 1 square mile area.
- CosmicH, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3Wow. I'm amazed at how quickly they responded to to the public's disapproval for the moratorium. Awesome.
If only the rest of the administration acted the same way. - UltraDavid, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6dang, can outrage actually work sometimes? hmm...
*tries to hate telecom immunity even harder* - VitriolAndAngst, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4Basically because they got caught putting needless red tape in front of energy alternatives. Man I cannot wait until these jerks are out of the white house.
- FaithclubDotNet, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Congratulations to all you who wrote your Congressmen and the Bureau of Land Management. Now, remember your thank yous!
- BuckNutty, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Is it any wonder that the rest of the world looks at the US as just a bunch of bullying retards?
- beauley, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1With Global Warming on many people's minds, do we have any ideas of the best way to lessen the impact on our future, or maybe a possible relief of its possible ravages or even a possible key to its eventual reversal. Many scientific experts have proposed
http://www.quazen.com/Science/Technology/Solar-Pow ...
Solar Power, Source of Endless Energy
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by