Second thoughts on alternative energy

September 23, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Wind and solar have always seemed like the über energy. Clean, seemingly limitless and potentially cheap—what’s not to like?

Biofuels offer a different, but also powerful appeal. Turn the Midwest, one of the world’s plumpest areas of prime farmland, into a big ethanol and biodiesel factory. Consumers never run out of fuel, new industries are stimulated and farmers make more money, so everyone wins.

Each type has always had its unique drawbacks, but their overall prospects nevertheless seemed reasonably bright.

However, a new study from The Nature Conservancy tempers some of the enthusiasm. If the United States wants to create enough alternative energy to meet the carbon cap-and-trade legislation now before Congress, we’d have to devote an additional 79,500 square miles to the task by 2030. That’s a footprint twice the size of Indiana.

Even if the study exaggerates the impact, it’s still a lot of land.

Most of the space would be allocated to growing crops for biofuels. But some of it also would be pockmarked with wind turbines and paved over with solar collectors.

Delving further into alternative energy is fine and good, the Nature Conservancy says, provided damage to natural habitat is minimized and projects are located on marginal land or brown fields. But the conservation organization emphasizes Americans should make improving efficiency the first priority.

What are your thoughts? Are we leaving efficiency on the sidelines in our enthusiasm for alternative energy?

  • The first time something is done is probably the most inefficient way it will ever be done. One day we will be recycling aluminum cans from orbit. But right now the job gets done by bending over and picking them up. Just because its not the most efficient way to do it, doesn't mean its not a job worth doing. This is the first time since the industrial revolution that we are trying to become energy independent using alternative energy. Its not going to be that efficient, but it is a job worth doing. Years from now when they recycle aluminum from orbit they will have much more efficient ways to create alternative energy. Right now the task is in front of us and we should just get doing, and find the efficiencies along the way.
  • Yes, energy efficiency should be priority one ahead of marginally economic resources (wind and solar). What's the status of the Governor's plan to increase the building code requirements in the state?
  • There are several alternatives for energy, among them, nuclear. We, as Americans, seem to fear nuclear energy, while every US Naval Vessel is a floating nuclear power plant. The French generate about 80% of their enery grom nuclear energy, and I would assume that if they are smart enought to do it, we are too. We are too dependent on fossil fuels. The issue of green house gases is the production of carbon dioxide during the burning of fossil fuels. We must develop an alternative energy source that does not produce carbon dioxide as a by product to the production of energy.
  • Are the The Nature Conservancy's data based on current levels of consumption and lifestyles? Energy costs will eventually drive people to consumer less and live differently. Alternative energy production will be essential, as will lifestyle changes. The latter will reduce the demand for energy.

    Post a comment to this blog

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    1. "This was a very localized, Indiana issue," he said. As in, Indiana failed to expand Medicaid to cover its poor citizens resulting in the loss of essential medical services, including this EMS company. Well done, Indiana GOP. Here are the real death panels: GOP state governments who refuse to expand Medicaid for political reasons.

    2. In the "one for all, all for none" socialist doctrine the sick die...this plus obama"care" equates to caucasian genocide plus pushed flight to cities thus further eroding the conservative base and the continualed spiral toward complete liberal/progressive/marxist America.

    3. There is a simple reason why WISH is not reporting on this story. LIN has others stations in different markets that are affiliated with CBS. Reporting about CBS blindsiding WISH/LIN due to CBS's greed and bullying tatics would risk any future negoations LIN will have with CBS in other markets.

    4. My best always! Dave Wilson

    5. How did Columbus, Ohio pull off a car share service without a single dollar of public subsidies? They must not have a mayor who is on the take like Indianapolis. Daimler Benz offers Columbus residents their Smart Cars on a market-driven basis: "This has some neat features. Cars don’t have to be picked up and dropped off at fixed points. You find one with your smart phone based on GPS, and drop it off anywhere in the service area you can find a spot – even at a meter. These cars aren’t required to feed the meter so you get free on street parking while using them. I was told this system was put in place on a market basis without subsidies – and that the vendor actually pays the city for the use of the meters."