Loading...
You are here:  Home  >  OHV Issues  >  Current Article

Feinstein Locking Up The Land (January 2010)

By   /   May 3, 2014  /   4 Comments

    Print       Email

When it comes to energy, she’s against it | whatever, energy, anyway – Opinion – Victorville Daily Press

(FLASHBACK-January 2010)-STEVE WILLIAMS Opinion Page Editor

I don’t know what they have to say, It makes no difference anyway, Whatever it is, I’m against it. No matter what it is or who commenced it, I’m against it.—Groucho Marx in ‘Horsefeathers’ (1932)

That would be California Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s stand on developing energy, of all sorts and types. She’s against it.

Her latest “I’m against it” gig occurred last week when she came out against using Mojave Desert land for solar and wind power projects.

The senator introduced legislation Dec. 21 to establish two national monuments on roughly 1 million acres of Mojave Desert land, one called Mojave Trails National Monument. The legislation would prohibit development on 941,000 acres of federal land and former railroad company property along a 105-mile-long stretch of old Route 66, between Ludlow and Needles.

Her proposal, of course, is aimed at wind and solar — mostly solar — projects.

Several energy companies involved in wind and solar-produced electricity have been looking at the Mojave for years as a perfect place for renewable energy projects. But recently, apparently in the face of Feinstein’s opposition, two of them, BrightSource Energy Inc. and Stirling Energy Systems, scrapped plans to build solar and wind farms on a stretch of the proposed Mojave Trails monument.

But that’s only the senator’s latest attack on energy development and production in this country. Back in 2003, when George W. Bush was proposing federal subsidies for construction of new nuclear plants in the United States, Feinstein said in a Senate speech that, “I strongly believe it is not in the public interest for our nation to subsidize costly nuclear plants. Instead we should devote more resources to the development of renewable energy.” Um, would that include wind and solar? Apparently not.

And then there’s oil exploration and production off the California coast. In 2008, in response to $4.50 a gallon gasoline, Bush lifted the executive order banning such drilling. Lady Di’s response? “This would be a terrible mistake. It would put our nation’s (read: California’s) precious coastlines in jeopardy and wouldn’t begin to fix the underlying energy-supply problem.” But what would?

This is all so typical, and reflects the not-inmy-back-yard stand on energy development taken by liberals, captives of the enviro-activists. Remember the Cape Wind controversy? Cape Wind, an energy development firm, spent millions of dollars in litigation costs, delays and regulatory hurdles in attempting to build a 130-turbine offshore project in Nantucket Sound. That was Ted Kennedy and John Kerry country, so they nixed the project even though the turbines would have been barely visible on the horizon from the shores of the Sound.

Monday the Wall Street Journal reported that a Korean-led consortium has won a landmark contract, valued at about $20.4 billion, to build four nuclear reactors in the United Arab Emirates. U.A.E., remember, is awash in oil, yet has opted to build the reactors. Why? U.A.E.’s leaders are not fools. It’s cheaper (and ultimately safer if one considers that nuclear reactors do not emit any of those pollutants enviros consider unsafe to human health and the planet, such as CO2) to build the plants so the oil saved can be sold elsewhere.

Remember too that U.A.E. is pretty much all desert, a perfect place for solar generation. But then remember that solar requires huge swaths of land, whereas nukes do not. Gwyneth Cravens, author of the book, “Power to Save the World. The truth about Nuclear Energy,” points out that “A nuclear power plant producing 1,000 megawatts takes up a third of a square mile. A wind farm would have to cover over 200 square miles to obtain the same result, and a solar array over 50 square miles.”

Fat chance we’ll build any new nukes in California anytime soon, though. Or wind farms or solar plants either. Di’s against it.

    Print       Email

About the author

Dan OBrien

Publisher

Cactus Thorns has been online in one form or the other since 2001. What started as a personal blog documenting the corruption and lack of Due Process of the 29 Palms Community Development Department has turned into over these many years into a hugely popular Independent Alternative News Media Outlet. We have partnered with other media including The Desert Star Weekly, Joshua Tree Star, other blogs, indie media and an incredible staff of volunteer Reporters, Commentators and Opinion Makers to create one of the most read, honest and dependable alternative to the Local traditional Media services in the country. Thanks to you the reader we are in the 5% of most read sites in the World.

4 Comments

  1. Mike Hawkins Mike says:

    Some things to think about.

    Senator Feinstein’s bill will stop all renewable energy development and the proposed 29 Palms Marine Base expansion into a “not that remarkable” and mostly vacant desert from the eastern boundary of the Marine Base, all the way to the Colorado River, 70 miles away.

    And it will block any new mining in a mineral rich portion of the desert that has been actively exploited by sizable Borax and Salt mine operations for decades, gold too. And, there is even a limited amount of agri-business in the Cadiz valley east of Amboy, south of a busy railroad.

    If Feinstein gets this through, all of the green energy projects, the Marine Base expansion needed to prepare our forces for fighting in the Middle East and every other concern in need of desert land will, by necessity, look to the other side of the Base for accommodation… at huge public expense.

    It will devastate the communities of Johnson Valley, Landers and Yucca Mesa (collectively known as Homestead Valley). The near by Town of Lucerne will be similarly impacted.

    The diverse wealth of recreational opportunities we now enjoy in Homestead Valley will be lost.

    Supporting businesses, Gas Stations, Restraints and Grocery Stores will be adversely affected as will the more specialized suppliers of all that recreational equipment, a huge industry.

    Rural Homestead Valley offers OHV access to businesses and residences via privately maintained (dirt) roads from a grand assortment of exciting “LEGAL” BLM trails surrounding these communities. Those trails would undoubtedly be sacrificed to the aforementioned energy conglomerates and related infrastructure if Feinstein denies them the less encumbered land east of the base.

    That would be bad enough but there’s more… …namely the proposed, and problematic, Marine Base expansion. Virtually every off-roader in the Nation and all the Global Rock Crawling organizations are aware and concerned about the Military’s expansion needs and the interest they have shown in our open recreation area as one of their proposals.

    Passage of Feinstein’s bill would totally eliminate any possibility of the Pentagon expanding the 29 Palms Marine Base into the Afghanistan like badlands that are the Sheep Hole Mountains east of the Base. That would virtually guarantee the loss of the Johnson Valley Open Recreation area.

    The Johnson Valley Open Recreation Area, west of the Base, managed by the BLM, is used extensively by the public and offers a broad range of recreational opportunity but of particular note is that it purports to be the largest OPEN OHV area in the nation!

    A lot of good Folks, from concerned citizens and various organizations, to the Marines and their liaisons, have worked very hard, for a very long time, to find a workable solution. One possibility the Marines were considering was expanding the base eastward in order to avoid conflict in the Homestead Valley. Feinstein’s Bill completely removes that possibility from the table!

    Additionally, her Bill identifies other places in Southern California for designations that will make them, basically impossible to use as well. And she wants all that included in this massive and discriminatory (MAD) regulation plan.

    We need more land locked away from intelligent productive use like we need this economic crisis to continue. That’s exactly what would happen too. Has anyone noticed, we can’t even afford to manage the vast tracts of land we’ve already set aside?

    Surveying, mapping, signage, general maintenance, enforcement of the restrictions, associated administrative bureaucracies and so on, ain’t free!

    We are broke (in case you haven’t noticed) so should we borrow, just a little more, from Folks that will never share our vision, China for instance, or the Middle East? Or, should we put these resources to work.

    What happens when we can no longer repay our enemies? Does that prospect worry anyone?

    It’s a catch 22 that makes no sense. We indebt ourselves in order to lock away the very land our children will need to have in use (producing renewable energy for instance) in order to repay the debt we incurred by locking the land away in the first place. I think it looks and quacks like stupidity. Don’t you?

    What’s it going to take to get our National organizations, those in favor of America’s Independence, to join us? We need to convince Congressional representation in every State that Feinstein’s bill will hurt a whale of a lot more than the good people of California.

  2. Carey Alderson Theoldman says:

    Here is the link to read her babble.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119LH9Ss:e0:

    Notice who “endorsed by: the California Wilderness Coalition; the Wildlands Conservancy; the Wilderness Society; the National Parks Conservation Association; Friends of the River; Cogentrix Energy; Edison International, parent company of Southern California Edison; Friends of Big Morongo Canyon Preserve; Friends of the Desert Mountains; Mojave Desert Land Trust; Desert Protective Council; Amargosa Conservancy; Death Valley Conservancy; the Cities of Barstow, Desert Hot Springs, Hesperia, Indio, Palm Springs, San Bernardino and Yucaipa; Riverside County Supervisor Marion Ashley; San Bernardino County Supervisor Neil Derry; Imperial County Supervisor Wally Leimgruber; Coachella Valley Association of Governments; SummerTree Institute; and Route 66 Preservation Foundation.”

  3. Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

    A who’s who’s list of those who wish to murder the tree of Liberty.

  4. Carey Alderson Theoldman says:

    “But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

    Declaration of Independence
    July 4, 1776

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
UA-9539515-1 e0a5d0bb00574423a5afb96d6b854248