As energy users, we are responsible for the impact of the extraction,
transportation and conversion of our energy sources. Unquestionably,
the impact of our current choices has been extensive: foreign policy in
the Middle East as we strive to protect the oil supply; the never ending
radioactive waste created by nuclear power plants; the massive oil
spills in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska; the contaminated groundwater
from natural gas exploration; the death and illness of miners working in
coal mines; the ecological disruption from hydro projects and the
inherent impact on the visual landscape from all generation sources.
Fortunately, technical progress made in the past 30 years has yielded
economically viable forms of alternative energy, which have indisputably
lower collective environmental and social impacts than any of our other
choices. But as promising as these new energy sources are, they are not
without some negative consequences.
SOMEONE IS IMPACTED
No matter what the energy source, someone is impacted. In terms of land
use, that land is always precious to someone. Who the "someone" is, or
"someones" are, how great the impact, or the character of the impact,
all enter this debate. Through our political process we sort through
these options, but our concerns are usually locally focused and tend to
avoid the faraway or bigger picture impact. Solar and wind energy are
the most "democratic" forms as they are distributed widely across the
planet providing the masses with their own delivered energy source, as
compared to the historically exploited "concentrated" forms of energy
that inevitably focused economic, social and political power into a few
hands.
In the current debate, the focus is about local impact with almost
nothing about the broader consequences of our energy choices. The
discussion in this Valley seems to focus on issues like how it will
look, sound or feel from my house. We're asking questions such as, Will
it impact the revenues and benefits we all enjoy from tourism? We ask,
Who's making money off this? But, we also need to ask about the
implications on a broader scale: environmentally, economically and
politically. Questions on the local level should include impacts to our
tax base, to our future energy cost and availability, to local economic
growth, to regional job creation, to global warming, to energy security,
and the list goes on.
NIMBY
If, in the end, the decision about our energy sources is only Not In My
Backyard, then we are choosing instead to put our energy sources in
someone else's backyard. Realistically, we will need to reward them for
their sacrifice - for the impact they will absorb to produce our energy.
We can ask others to bear the impacts our energy needs - we just have
to pay the bill. What type of trade-off are we willing to make between
our pocketbooks and our viewscape?
The emergence of renewables into our energy reality is going to take
some getting used to. Our current debate will be valuable if it fully
informs us, engages us in real conversations, and confronts the
comprehensive implications of our energy choices. When we take
responsibility for our choices and acknowledge the total impact on us
and on others, then we will be taking steps toward responsibly meeting
our current and future energy challenges. One way or another, our
21st-century energy appetite comes with a price tag - it always has.
Coleman lives in Warren.
