LETTER: Double standard favors renewable energy
A recent headline in the Aspen Daily News stated “Feds nix eagle penalties for California wind farm.”
Am I the only reader who sees a double standard in the way this administration treats renewable versus fossil energy projects? If ponds at an oil well site were not protected by nets, and if an eagle (or sage grouse) died in one of them, do you think the penalties would be nixed? Of course not.
Yes, it is good that the nation is diversifying its energy sources, but how about being realistic about the social, economic and environmental impacts from renewable energy that are not insignificant in many respects?
Thank you, Mr. Michael Hutchins of the American Bird Conservancy for saying “wind energy has gotten ahead of the science and regulation.” Birds and bats beware.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.