|
Windmills
vs. MSHCP vs. Solar
’Tis
a Puzzlement
Recently
the majority of the City Council voted to pass a resolution objecting
to the installation of any new windmills in the western area of the
DHS sphere of influence (SOI).
There
were several reasons listed as objections to the windmills:
They
are ugly
They
destroy the viewscape
They
pollute the ground water
They
kill birds and are injurious to other wildlife
They
don’t provide that much electricity – so we don’t
need them
The
counter arguments are:
They
are a permitted use in the industrially zoned areas
The
State is encouraging an increase in the permitting and use of wind
energy - http://www.energy.ca.gov/wind/overview.html
It
forestalls or replaces the need to build potentially more polluting
conventional power plants.
It
produces virtually no pollution of air, water or soil.
It
is renewable (non-depletable). There is enough potential wind energy
in the U.S. to power the entire country.
Because
of its modular nature, it is easy to add capacity as needed.
Installing
wind turbines is relatively quick.
While
the power is currently more expensive than that produced by natural
gas-fired plants, the price of wind power is not affected by fuel
price increases or supply disruptions.
There
is currently an attractive federal tax credit for wind generation.
Those
arguments will not be quickly or easily resolved; however, here are
some facts which apply to the City of Desert Hot Springs:
There are no windmills within the
City limits of Desert Hot Springs
There
are windmills in the County area, Palm Springs and Cathedral City.
Unfortunately, Desert Hot Springs has no standing at the table –
they can only object.
With
both Cathedral City and Palm Springs having annexed across I-10
(while we were sleeping) they can encourage windmills as it will not
affect their viewscape, etc..
Since
Desert Hot Springs voted against the County, Palm Springs and
Cathedral City regarding the MSHCP – how sensitive do you
expect those cities to be regarding our sentiments?
While
new windmills are proposed in the DHS sphere of influence –
since we haven’t annexed the land – we are at the end of
the food chain and the food is gone.
Now,
what about the MSHCP and how does it enter into this equation. The
arguments against the windmill expansion center on restricting the
right of property owners to use their properties as they wish.
The
main objection to the MSHCP, as cited by the Council, was that it
would deprive property owners of the right to use their property as
they wish.
This
seems terribly inconsistent!
If
the governing body of an area has the responsibility to lookout for
the common good it would seem that protecting wildlife – the
MSHCP – would fulfill this mission. In order to be consistent
DHS MUST annex the land where the proposed windmills are projected.
Then and only then will they have a “seat of honor” at
the table when this matter comes up for discussion.
What
about Solar?
Perhaps
significant ordinances within the city requiring a given percentage
of new homes to have solar – or at least be solar compatible –
would help with the energy saving goals.
Or,
why not push for solar panels at the base of the existing windmills –
that way we get two clucks for our buck. But first,
Annex,
Annex, Annex!
www.KARLBAKER.info |
