Pop quiz: Do you save the planet from global warming by switching to renewable energy sources, or do you protect a species from tragic death knowing you’ll make the planet uninhabitable in somewhere between 5 to 5 million years? After years of making the rest of us crazy with guilt in the competing claims of righteousness between paper and plastic, it’s fun to watch the environmentalists squirm.
Such is the case along Texas’ Gulf Coast, where a proposed wind-farm (how much fertilizer is needed? and wouldn’t space just outside the Capitol provide the requiste hot-air?) is being built to generate electricity. After the nenergy expended by environmentalists in opposing coal, nuclear and natural gas plants everywhere proposed, and urging us to use wind and solar, you’d think the enviros would be happy.
But they are decidedly unhappy lot. The Browsville Herald is reporting that the Gulf Coast project “could have a ‘catastrophic’ impact on migrating and local birds, according to a new environmental review commissioned by the Coastal Habitat Alliance.”
The Coastal Habitat Alliance — which uses as its spokes-human an Austin-based, left-leaning ad-agency — says the wind farm (which is being built on private property) might as well go up on a “wildlife refuge.”
The newspaper casually mentions that the “U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and other agencies” have looked at the project and “haven’t expressed the same complaints.”
Does that mean they haven’t had any complaints, or that the complaints have been different, or worse? That’s left to the imagination.
And no story about the environment is complete without lawsuits. The Coastal Habitat Alliance is suing the company building the windfarm.
Sadly, this means lawyers are not yet an endangered species.