It is interesting that all the urban dwellers, who tend to be members of the Cult of Climastrology, always want solar and wind farms, as long as they are Over There, usually meaning in the areas where Republicans voters live
Rural opposition to solar farms goes beyond beliefs in climate change
When it comes to local support versus opposition against large scale solar farms there are a number of factors at play in the divide that may surprise you. One university sought out to find out more.
With New York State’s ambitious decarbonization goals of being 70% renewable by 2030, there’s a lot of enthusiasm for solar energy that’s also being met with opposition primarily in rural areas of upstate that go beyond being for or against the idea of climate change.
In a survey conducted by Professor Richard Stedman at Cornell, it was found that while most people support the idea of solar energy in general, those views become a bit more divided when it comes to the installment of large-scale solar farms.
“When you ask more specifically about big solar, utility scale solar, which are these facilities that cover hundreds of acres potentially thousands of acres in some cases you do get much more of a divide,” says Stedman.
This divide primarily comes from rural communities feeling like they’re “taking one for the team” in terms of providing energy to downstate interests in particular; all centered around this sense of carrying the “rural burden.”
“There’s this sense among some that rural people and rural places are being asked to bear the cost of this development, in terms of loss of scenic vistas, loss of access, wildlife impacts farming impacts, without reaping any of the benefits,” says Stedman.
Interestingly, those downstate aren’t all that interested in reducing their own use of electricity in order to mitigate their own carbon footprints. No, they just want it all, while attempting to force the people in the rural areas to bear the costs. How many of those urbanites really get out in the country? If they do, they typically view rural folks as bumpkins, stupid, living in Dumbfuckistan. Utterly condescending and nasty.
Those who are much more attached to their landscape and community are less likely to invest in energy especially in an area that identifies strongly with being from upstate versus downstate, and with little experience in large scale solar.
Why don’t those in the urban areas invest? Hey, they could replace Central Park with solar panels. Put a bunch of wind turbines off of the 5 Boroughs. Same thing in Dem strongholds like Albany, Buffalo, and Syracuse.
“Putting in the time to try and understand local community perspectives is super important in trying to roll out utility scale solar,” says Stedman.
In other words, the cult wants to force the rural folks to accept this.
Mr Teach continues to divide Americans. Rural vs urban!! No compromise!! Take no prisoners!!
Almost all Americans want to live their lives, provide for and enjoy their families.
My work gave me the opportunity to live in remote areas and in big cities. Now retired I chose to live in a very rural area surrounded by hay fields and orchards. I do not care to have windmills or solar panel farms destroying the landscape. Oil and coal work just fine for generating electricity but nuclear would be fine with me. It’s clear that electric cars are doing more damage to the environment with mining of nickel, lithium, cobalt and other minerals. Electric trucks are a joke and so the all the climate hysteria.
It’s a shame so many believe the news and liberal talking points. Incapable of making their own informed decisions.
Those city buildings don’t really need glass exteriors. They could have windmills and solar panels attached instead. Everyone needs to do their part. It isn’t fair for the cities to expect the rural areas and suburbs to pay the social cost of hosting power generation. The rural areas already host all of the food production. Detroit has a lot of land reclaimed from urban areas that are now suitable for other purposes. Maybe the Democrats can do the same thing for a city near you.
Of course, if it weren’t for unrestricted immigration, there would be no need for massive growth in power generation since the USA would have a declining population, even in the cities.
Yikes. In favor of a declining population? A sure sign of a dying culture.
More old folks, fewer young! Hello old folks home, good-bye economy! Deflation! Recession!
Our distinguished host quoted:
Is it surprising that the people who live in more rural areas live there because they want to live there?
The area in which I live would be absolutely perfect for solar farms: mostly flat river bottom land, facing southwest. We might be able to make a few bucks by having a solar farm on our land, but my darling bride — of 44 years and 24 days — would be absolutely horrified at having our view spoiled. Windmills would be less effective, in that there is less wind here than you might guess.
People in rural areas have made some deliberate trade-offs. To go to a decent restaurant means a 22 mile drive. There are no private schools around here, and little industry. For the things that urbanites enjoy, we have to drive to Richmond or Lexington.
But we also have far lower housing and land costs, and much lower taxes. If we forget to lock the doors at night, it really doesn’t matter. When we look up at the night sky, we can actually see the stars. In the second-closest town there are four traffic lights; in the closest, there are zero! We can have chickens or goats or cows, and we don’t have to walk the dogs; they can just go outside, on their own. And if you need to hire someone to do something you can’t, you can always ask, “Is there a discount for cash?”, and you’ll frequently find that there is one.
What is this “walking the dogs” of which you speak? Metaphore?
There are plusses and minuses with both rural and urban/suburban life. I love both.
Grew up in the MO Ozarks, lived in a small town 30 mi south of St Louis for years, moved to suburbs of St Louis for work 40 years ago.
Our youngest son has a 2nd home on a river 40 mi south of here where he goes most weekends kayaking/fishing with his son and friends. My friend has a farm some 100 mi south where the nearest town is 20 mi west. The night sky there is an astronomy textbook.
As we transition to non-fossil fuel energy sources we’ll find compromises. Cities (where most of the people are) use the most energy by far, so they “deserve” much of the inconvenience. Of course, nuclear reactors and coal plants are usually not placed in population centers.
Dear Elwood:
“As we transition to non-fossil fuel energy sources we’ll find compromises.”
Your son has a second home that he uses for his amusement.. and yet you want others to sacrifice there life styles.
Very narcissist of you.
James,
Are you against outdoor recreation? You should take it up with my son. He’s a grown-up and would be happy to set your “thinking” straight.
And I didn’t ask you to sacrifice your lifestyle, did I?
Now, piss off.
The meteorologist from Missouri wrote:
In supporting the proposals to fight
global warmingclimate change, you are very much asking all of us to sacrifice our lifestyles.I don’t hear much “compromise” from the Green New Dealers.
I hear forcing changes in housing, transportation, food, healthcare, employment, energy sources; 15 minute cities, outlawing gasoline and diesel vehicles, eat bugs, blackouts and brownouts because of undependable “alternative” energy, slashing tires of SUVs, forcing experimental medical treatments on people in order to have the freedom to travel.
The transition is not natural, it is being forced by idealogues who distort our economy and attempt to wrestle control through political means. The market, true economics, is not what is driving this transition. That means there is no compromise occurring.
On the other hand, it seems like a wonderful plan to put the power generation capacity for urban areas in rural areas where they can be easily disrupted and sabotaged. Go ahead an invest in all this expensive generation capacity … and when the urban voters attempt to infringe on our rights, we can turn off their lights as easily as a few shotgun blasts to those solar panels, toppling some high voltage line towers, and a few well -placed shots to those wind turbine generators.
Believe me that Mr. Teach is not the one dividing urban and rural people. The collectivist urban populations that think they can tell everyone else how to live, what should be taught to their children, what to eat, what firearms they can own, whether they should be allowed to own private property have made their intentions all too clear. Rural folks hate them in a general group sense, and have for some time. The urban collectivists don’t know their limitations.
@ RuralCousel,
I would advise against the destruction of property you recommend. If the infrastructure is in the rural area, so is the off switch. Just ask the guy who works there to turn it off in a responsible way that doesn’t permanently damage property or risk life and safety. Destruction of people and property is bad.
Ahhh, but a switch that can be turned off can be turned right back on.
Is the anarchist Dana supporting the destruction of American infrastructure?
Let the war begin!!
I’m just describing what will inevitably happen if the relationship between urban and rural goes hot. Urban politicians don’t see what they are doing as initiating war, but that’s exactly what they are doing by trying to force everyone to live by their rules.
Believe me, far worse will happen than the lights going out in the big cities. If civil war comes to America, there will be no rules of engagement.
When we were approached about leasing our farmland for a ‘solar farm’, I politely told the folks what they could do with their panels.
I like the Professor’s suggestion that they hang solar panels on their buildings and maybe even put windmills on the roof deck. The caution about vandalizing the ones in rural areas is a good one, so just leave that sort of thing to BLM or Antifa.
The problem with wind and solar is that they will never be a useful source of power on any industrial scale, certainly not enough to power urban areas. So it’s quite understandable that rural folk don’t wish to have their lives disrupted for an ineffective solution to someone else’s needs.
Got potatoes?
All you need is a couple of potatoes, a set of wires, two nails, two pennies, a socket and a light bulb, voila, you have light.
Always a solution for a problem.
Easy answer, just need a factory to make copper wire, a coin mint, and another factory to make porcelain sockets.
You’ll need some copper or brass screws too.
You’ll need a power plant using coal or diesel to generate the electricity. Hydro-power comes in handy too.
Nuclear power goes to plaid right now.
There are electrical outlets in your house, plug in the Fry Daddy and make some french fries.
You’ll need planes, trains and automobiles and trucks and trailers and food factories.
Everything you need to stay alive, in other words.
Hydrocarbons to the rescue.