It might be tempting to shrug at the scorching weather across large swaths of the West. This just in: It gets hot in the summer.
But this record-setting heat wave's remarkable power, size and unusually early appearance is giving meteorologists and climate experts yet more cause for concern about the routinization of extreme weather in an era of climate change.
These sprawling, persistent high-pressure zones popularly called "heat domes" are relatively common in later summer months. This current system is different. Deepening Drought Holds 'Ominous' Signs For Wildfire Threat In The West Environment Deepening Drought Holds 'Ominous' Signs For Wildfire Threat In The West
"It's not only unusual for June, but it is pretty extreme even in absolute terms," says Daniel Swain, climate scientist at the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. "It would be a pretty extreme event for August," Swain says, when these typically occur.
It really bothers me to see that they are developing the big farm fields off of Stoner Trail in Johnstown into industrial solar energy facilities. It seems like one of the fastest growing forms of sprawl these days are the mega industrial solar farms which honestly don’t even produce that much energy compared to existing fossil plants which crank out far more energy with far lower environmental and land impacts. Probably a 5 megawatt solar farm sprawled over dozens acres of land compared to the 750 MW gas power plants a few miles down the road.
I think the obsession over climate change has gotten way out of hand, and while we should take reasonable steps to conserve energy and produce it efficiently and cleanly, on the whole nothing really beats fossil energy when it comes to clean, reliable, low environmental impact sources of energy. Roof top solar power and wind power in appropiate locations can be part of the solution but we also need to realistic about the impacts of all sources of energy.
I think we need to get away from the denialism of climate change won’t be inevitable by the left. All the evidence says it will be a serious problem that will hurt real people. But we also need energy to power society – natural gas, oil and coal aren’t going away – despite the denialism that these industrial solar and wind farms represent. Society has to make unpleasant choices and we are going to warm the planet and cause all kinds of pain by doing that but a lot of it is inevitable. But we can choose to protect our environment and our land, by choosing cleaner fossil fuel plants with better pollution controls over these industrial solar and wind farms.
Environmentalists have long promoted renewable energy sources like solar panels and wind farms to save the climate. But what about when those technologies destroy the environment? In this provocative talk, Time Magazine “Hero of the Environment” and energy expert, Michael Shellenberger explains why solar and wind farms require so much land for mining and energy production, and an alternative path to saving both the climate and the natural environment. Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine Hero of the Environment and President of Environmental Progress, a research and policy organization. A lifelong environmentalist, Michael changed his mind about nuclear energy and has helped save enough nuclear reactors to prevent an increase in carbon emissions equivalent to adding more than 10 million cars to the road. He lives in Berkeley, California.
Personally, I think the way to go is with cleaner natural gas plants, along with some renewables where they make sense and conservation efforts -- and realize that most of climate targets are jokes -- and that we are all going to have to suffer from whatever climate instability is out there. Nuclear is a dying technology, not only is it dangerous, expensive, and silly compared to just burning the fossil fuels directly. But he does make a good point about renewables and the problems they can pose.
Doesn’t seem really necessary for county to contract out to build out solar for government uses ☀️
I was reading a county legislator’s post the other day, and he was highlighting what another county was doing with a contract to a privately owned solar farm to provide renewable energy to county office buildings at a fixed price. While it seemed like a good idea in principal, it seemed also an wasteful example of government privatization.
So much of cost of solar these days isn’t the equipment, but of the labor to install solar panels and make the electrical connections up to code. But the thing is county governments already employ workers in Department of Public Works that have strong backs and are familiar with building maintenance and repairs. They can probably mount panels, including custom fabrication of any kind of stand or bracket the county would need for a solar installation. Moreover, county governments inevitably have small fleet of electricians on the payroll to fix common electrical problems in county buildings, and are fully qualified to make the connections between solar panels and the buildings’ existing electrical infrastructure. For design of system, they can contract out, but they don’t need to rely on external help when county employees can do it cheaper.
The county might be hesitant to plunk down a bunch of money for panels and electrical interconnection equipment, but they can bond them, especially if they have clear evidence of the savings in the out-years. By the county buying equipment directly, installing it and maintaining it in-house, this will make solar much more profitable for county in future. Why pay a separate electrician, when the county’s own staff can be dispatched to fix any problems with their panels? With so much of the cost of solar being labor these days, using county labor for solar panels on county buildings, it makes sense for county to purchase panels and supporting equipment themselves as a tax-exempt entity, and use existing labor in-house to install and maintain the system.
State lawmakers this month advanced a bill that would enact a statewide ban on the use of coal tar-based sealant products commonly used for driveways and parking lots.?
At issue is the chemcials found in the sealcoats, including concentrations of?polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that are considered toxic to aquatic life and lawmakers say are cancer-linked.?
The bill now goes to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's desk for his consideration before it becomes law. The measure has been sought for the last decade by Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal and environmental advocates.
