Published on March 16th, 2013 | by Guest Contributor5
SPIEGEL — Wrong Again
Reposted from Lenz Blog (image added):
Anybody paying attention to renewable energy issues in Germany knows that SPIEGEL magazine is the enemy. They publish one anti-renewable propaganda piece after the next.
Their latest talking point comes in this article published on Tuesday. Since I happen to have read Joe Romm’s book on language intelligence, I am not going to repeat their talking point. Instead I will just confirm the common sense knowledge that renewable energy is necessary to protect the environment.
You would not know it from reading that SPIEGEL article, but we have an environmental crisis of historic proportions at our hands. Global warming needs to be stopped, and it needs to be stopped quickly. This is not the time to put the brakes on renewable energy deployment by publishing this kind of article.
As I know from a source I can’t tell you about right now, if CO2 emissions don’t peak until July 17th, 2023, the planet will pass the final tipping point and be doomed to a runaway global meltdown feedback loop.
If you use wood pellets for heating, that reduces CO2 emissions in comparison to burning oil or coal. That of course has the effect that wood prices go up, and more trees are coming down to provide the wood. That is something that can’t be avoided if you use wood pellets in the first place.
If one builds a lot of solar and wind, that needs area. Some of the area will come from forests or other environmentally valuable places. That can’t be helped. Those solar panels and wind turbines need to go somewhere. If you object to some project because it might be inconvenient for some bird or other, keep in mind that without going ahead full speed with deployment those birds probably will go extinct anyway.
This reminds me of environmentalists in the United States who object to desert solar projects because they are concerned for desert turtles. And Mark Lynas’ strange idea that protection of biodiversity should take priority over stopping global warming.
It would be nice if one could displace fossil fuel without changing the environment at all. That is impossible. Wind and solar do have a large footprint. If you object to nuclear energy, like just about anybody in Germany, you just don’t have the luxury any more to object in any way to renewable energy, and you certainly won’t be able to displace fossil fuel by putting the brakes on because you want priority for birds or turtles.