Dept of Interior Reaffirms Its Commitment to Fully Developing Public Land Green Energy.

[Presswood_936]

Tell the Roan Plateau, battlement mesa, and piceance basin. As multi generational resident with friends and family currently and formally employed in the oil and gas industry I vociferously disagree. Sat imagery does not lie.

Those places would be better covered by solar farms ?

 

[squid-freshprints]

Those places would be better covered by solar farms ?

They would be better as they were. Plain and simple.

 

[Presswood_936]

They would be better as they were. Plain and simple.

Agreed , but back to my original comment . Which one is worse for wildlife?

 

[squid-freshprints]

Agreed , but back to my original comment . Which one is worse for wildlife?

In the case of these particular immaculate elk habitats, oil and gas was worse, proven facts that already happened. Damage done. Not theoretical.

 

[Presswood_936]

S

In the case of these particular immaculate elk habitats, oil and gas was worse, proven facts that already happened. Damage done. Not theoretical.

So it would’ve been better for solar panels to be there ?

 

[squid-freshprints]

S

So it would’ve been better for solar panels to be there ?

Reality. not theory. Was. not would be. Not worth conjecture.

 

[Presswood_936]

Reality. not theory. Was. not would be. Not worth conjecture.

Are you that thick ? Of course it’s worth conjecture when we are talking about theoretical new developments. There’s no way you can say the examples you gave would’ve been better off with solar panels

 

[squid-freshprints]

Are you that thick ? Of course it’s worth conjecture when we are talking about theoretical new developments. There’s no way you can say the examples you gave would’ve been better off with solar panels

So they are going to develop solar on top of the roan, wow! (according to my wife yes I am.)

 

[CJ19]

Reality. not theory. Was. not would be. Not worth conjecture.

oil and gas activity is certainly a reality. Legacy and orphaned oil and gas sites are not pretty and can be an issue to deal with for the public. My experience has been that the OG is much preferable than the renewable stuff, mainly wind where i live. I would prefer neither but like i said in my original post...unfortunately we are going to need energy from somewhere.

As far as theory vs reality. Lucky or unlucky for you, western colorado is going to get some new transmission lines and solar as part of the deal . Not as much as other states. so maybe the conventional and legacy OG will be worse there. I have not been to that exact part of CO so i couldnt say.

 

[WRO]

Energy development on public lands sucks.... When Americans don't get a cut. Especially oil and gas, sor.

At least something can live on a gas lease, ain’t shit living on a solar farm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swavescatter]

It’s not like they’re setting up solar farms in the back country. Next to a highway I would prefer shade panels over noisy oil derricks and fracking all day long. Fight me.

 

[roadrunner]

In the case of these particular immaculate elk habitats, oil and gas was worse, proven facts that already happened. Damage done. Not theoretical.

No it wasn't, and no it still isn't.

 

[roadrunner]

It’s not like they’re setting up solar farms in the back country. Next to a highway I would prefer shade panels over noisy oil derricks and fracking all day long. Fight me.

You don't know much about the industry, do you. Easy to spot by the terminology you use, and the misuse at that...

 

[swavescatter]

You don't know much about the industry, do you. Easy to spot by the terminology you use, and the misuse at that...

I hunt oil derricks regularly

Am I wrong? How do solar panels impact wildlife more than other forms of energy generation?

 

[squid-freshprints]

At least something can live on a gas lease, ain’t shit living on a solar farm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They did literally irradiate the surface and ground water here with nuclear weapons detonated underground for oil and gas. So no not very awesome. Look up Rulison project and fawn creek. Or peep the satellite imagery. I'm out.

 

[roadrunner]

I hunt oil derricks regularly

Am I wrong? How do solar panels impact wildlife more than other forms of energy generation?

Oil derrick's? They really aren't called that anymore...

 

[WRO]

I hunt oil derricks regularly

Am I wrong? How do solar panels impact wildlife more than other forms of energy generation?

Because they literally cover every inch of acreage with cover, nothing can co exist with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[*zap*]

Most of this alternative energy is just very costly virtue signaling by the misguided woken.

 

[swavescatter]

Oil derrick's? They really aren't called that anymore...

I get that you’re proving a very specific pedantic point, but can you enlighten me as to how solar panels impact wildlife more than oil derricks?

 

[roadrunner]

How do solar panels impact wildlife more than other forms of energy generation?

Energy "generation" via solar is a massive footprint; cutting, filling, and grading surface making it barren of all vegetation.

A natural gas horizontal well can have a lateral miles long and produce enough gas to generate the same output of power through a gas turbine (and more than when used in a combined cycle plant). The wellpad will take up 5 acres maybe.

To transmit solar cross country, you have to convert it to AC from DC where it was stored in batteries. To use it at its destination, it needs to be converted back to DC. It can't stay as AC because the origin is a finite source - a battery.

There is a loss each time it's converted, so what was 300 MW at the beginning isn't 300 MW where it ends up.

A combined cycle plant on 50 acres could generate 1 GW pretty easily. 600 acres for 30 plants can give you the same 30 GW.

That same 600 acres would only yield approximately 60 MW.

That's the difference. Solar takes a lot more acreage.