In the wake of the Solyndra scandal, green energy companies have been losing friends left and right, but at least they could count on support from loyal greens—or maybe not:
Two environmental groups in April filed suit to block an energy project they said would seriously harm the local ecosystem.
It wasn’t a coal plant, or an oil refinery, or a nuclear reactor. It was a wind farm — the very sort of “clean” energy environmentalists champion as an alternative to dirty traditional supplies. . . .
But national and local environmental groups are fighting to block or delay many solar plants, wind farms, hydropower and biomass plants and other forms of “clean” energy, along with new transmission lines needed to bring that energy to customers.
The effect, observers say, is to slow green energy growth. Even if renewable production rose at three times the overall energy output pace, it would still make up just 16% of domestic supplies by 2035, from 10% now, according to the Energy Department.
For years, the green argument was something like this: If only we can replace fossil fuels with cleaner, renewable energy sources, we can enjoy our current standard of living without endangering the environment. Now it appears some greens have advanced the argument to a brand new phase: It’s as if they’ve replaced a green energy policy with a no-energy policy.
Good luck with that.