Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Environmentalists sue to stop CA renewable energy plants

MongoTheGeek

MongoTheGeek

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 13, 2003
3,303
32
Its not so much where you are as when you are.
Two proposed geothermal power plants planned for federal lands in
northeastern California are in jeopardy due to a lawsuit filed by
environmental groups. Geothermal power plants use steam extracted from
wells drilled in areas near lava beds formed from past volcanic activity.

The California Wilderness Coalition, Citizens for a Quality Environment,
the Klamath Forest Alliances, and other groups recently filed suit in U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of California against several
government agencies and Calpine Corporation, the energy company planning
to build the plants, claiming they would transform "a scenic wonderland"
into "an ugly, noisy, stinking, industrial wasteland." The suit claims
that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service, which
approved the projects, failed to adequately weigh the environmental impact
of the project, in the process violating several environmental laws.

If built, the plants each would provide 50 megawatts of power.
Click to expand...

Not sure what to say...
 
I'm all for different types of energy, but:

claiming they would transform "a scenic wonderland"
into "an ugly, noisy, stinking, industrial wasteland."
Click to expand...

This is true and is what I've heard about hawaii's . (atleast the plants that I've seen in pictures.)
 
dopefiend said:
I'm all for different types of energy, but:



This is true and is what I've heard about hawaii's . (atleast the plants that I've seen in pictures.)
Click to expand...

The pictures I've seen of ones in Iceland look fairly innocuous.

Doing a quick google for images they all seem to be fairly small footprint with a road in and lines out. The only output from them are copious clouds of steam.
 
The sad thing is that these environmentalists are shooting down free, cheap and a relatively renewable energy source that isn't going to harm the environment like gas, oil or coal.

I think what they are complaining about is harm done to their aesthetic tastes in seeing a power plant in the wilderness....blah!

D
 
Building a plant that helps the environment by producing clean energy, but ruining the surrounding environment completely.......that sounds counterproductive, I think.

They're only taking advantage of steam, so what with the dirty industrial comments? What makes them worse than any other plant?
 
I think the problem is that they'll create a giant steaming lake/moat around the plant. Im not sure exactly where this is going to be put in, but I'd rather have a Geothermal plant in the middle of nowhere (including the lake) than a giant fossil fuel plant.
 
hob said:
how can environmentalist be opposed to renewable energy??
Click to expand...

I think the point is where they are putting it and how it is designed. It is not against the renewable energy, but how it is being implemented. I would guess there is a big reason why...unless they are all smoking too much pot...then maybe it is where they are growing the crops :D Maybe the steam will kill their plants.

On a more serious note...the recent oil issues abroad and our ignoranance about the real problem with our current energy sources and high usage rates are the important thing to keep in mind. I hope they get this figured out so they can get to work on a good source of energy that IS renewable and not damaging to the landscape *(within reason).

Johnny
 
flyfish29 said:
On a more serious note...the recent oil issues abroad and our ignoranance about the real problem with our current energy sources and high usage rates are the important thing to keep in mind. I hope they get this figured out so they can get to work on a good source of energy that IS renewable and not damaging to the landscape *(within reason).
Click to expand...

Most of the designs that I have seen are not that intrusive and don't have to be. They are fairly low profile, 2 stories, and not all that large, an acre or so) Most of it takes place underground. All you need is a few pumps and a couple of turbines and some heat exchangers. In a decade trees will obscure everything except a steam cloud and external access.
 
It seems that environmental groups are all about complaining. They never seem to be happy no matter what. We have the same problem here in Massachusetts. A group wants to build a wind farm 100 miles off of Cape Cod. It would produce enough energy to almost supply the Cape. It's environmental groups that complain. It seems that they won't be happy till we are living in caves again.
 
MongoTheGeek said:
Most of the designs that I have seen are not that intrusive and don't have to be. They are fairly low profile, 2 stories, and not all that large, an acre or so) Most of it takes place underground. All you need is a few pumps and a couple of turbines and some heat exchangers. In a decade trees will obscure everything except a steam cloud and external access.
Click to expand...

I agree, most of the designs I have seen are similar, but obviously there is a reason they are protesting it at that specific site...I just hope it is a legit one and not just that we need a few more grass blades or trees. Cause if we continue down the non-renewable pollution creating road we are on we are going to living in those caves soon enough as well as having roads that have to be covered due to the pollution like in all the sci fi movies.
 
wdlove said:
It seems that environmental groups are all about complaining. They never seem to be happy no matter what. We have the same problem here in Massachusetts. A group wants to build a wind farm 100 miles off of Cape Cod. It would produce enough energy to almost supply the Cape. It's environmental groups that complain. It seems that they won't be happy till we are living in caves again.
Click to expand...
I think in the Cape Cod case it's also fishermen and general boat people that don't like it. In a dense fog, it would be very easy to nail one of those suckers right on.
 
Calvinatir said:
F*ck environmentalists
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily like or agree the extremest stances many environmentalist groups take, but unfortunately we live in a society where the only real change seems to happen when there are those that take that stance.

I believe this extremist stance does several things to promote change. It creates discussion like this one here. I know I hadn't thought about boats running into the wind turbines on the ocean during fog and if it hadn't been for this extreme stance being discussed here I might have never known that fact.

I believe extremests also make it easier for my own comments and thoughts to be heard and not seem so extreme to those that oppose me or don't understand the issue. If there was no one in that "extreme" role then all of the sudden I am extreme...when actually in reality my thoughts are not so extreme.

The civil rights movement might have never happened if there hadn't been extremist groups to make those speaking about change seem less extreme.
 
Calvinatir said:
F*ck environmentalists
Click to expand...

Well, that was intelligent. Thanks for your input. :rolleyes:

I think if they got an environmentally-sensitive architect, they could perhaps bridge the gap between the two groups. But, in the U.S, architecture is not seen as the fusion of art, science, and environmentalism that it truly is.

I would propose opening up the project to a competition of architects and landscape architects with the goal of creating a site that has a minimal footprint, and minimal environmental impact. One that blends into the surrounding landscape. There's many structures that can be used as precedent for this.
 
It's ironic to me that the environmentalist groups seem to actually keep us more dependent on fossil fuels. They are consistently attacking other means of power production (Hydroelectric, Geothermal, etc.) because of "adverse" effects on the surrounding environment. Yes there will be some adverse effects to the immediate environment, but for right now it does not appear possible to generate power--which we need--without affecting the environment to some dgree. These groups keep these alternative power plants from being constructed essentially forcing us to continue using fossil fuels for power generation. I know they would love to get rid of those as well, but they can't as it is too well established and so it remains our major source of energy.

If they embraced some of these alternative methods (which they support in principle, but not in practice as evidenced by the many suits against such plants) instead of blocking every attempt to build one, we might be able to decrease our dependence on fossil fuels for power generation. This would only leave our cars still using fossil fuels. Eventually, we could get rid of those as well, but we have to start somewhere.
 
e-coli said:
Well, that was intelligent. Thanks for your input. :rolleyes:

I would propose opening up the project to a competition of architects and landscape architects with the goal of creating a site that has a minimal footprint, and minimal environmental impact. One that blends into the surrounding landscape. There's many structures that can be used as precedent for this.
Click to expand...

Very good idea! And I am still cracking up over your firstl line! :D
 
hob said:
how can environmentalist be opposed to renewable energy??
Click to expand...
theese are hippies not enviromentalists (enviromentalists hope for a better enviroment and moan but less so than hippies who like to dress mup and smoke pot and if something looks bad they dont like it also most are opposed to goverment and are hypocrites ie save the enviroment but drive around in a hue bus and do nothing except get high)
venting done
 
If they are going to continue to complain about attempts at renewable energy, then they have no right to complain. They can't have their cake and eat it too. Haven't they every heard of the art of compromise, or is that a dead art?
 
Geothermal plant problem

The problem that the environmentalists are most likely focusing on is that these would probably be steam turbine plants where water would be injected into the ground, flashed into steam by the geothermal heat, the steam would drive turbines that produce electricity & then the steam would be vented into the atmosphere. This means you require turbines, pumps/injectors, typical mess of electrical distribution equipment & all the associated buidlings. Plus you end up with assorted dissolved chemicals that are leached out of the ground & that then come out with the steam & end up precipitated or rained out both locally & downwind.

It seems like there should be some way to utilize heatpipe technology to convert the subsurface heat directly into electricity without using the injection & subsequent release of polluted steam.
 
Why are any of you surprised about this at all?

Environmentalists are for the environment, they are also against people.
They would like for everyone to return to subsistence farming using oxen and plow, no, make that no plow and no irrigation ditches, since that would harm the aesthetics of the area.

Do it for Gaia!!!!

(Did I do good? Didn't I say what you wanted me to say? Nooooo... no the electric prod. I SAID WHAT YOU WANTED ME TO SAY!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! <ZAP> <whimper> )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back