Thank you, Lars, for pointing out how the claim that "the climate is going to
change no matter what we humans do" is a deflection from the reality that human
activity is a major driver of the accelerated change that we're seeing.
As a reality check regarding nuclear power in the USA, in fact two new
large-scale power plants in Georgia are on track to licensing and operation.
They've already ordered the first new fuel-rod shipment and now are performing
final system checks prior to start-up:
[
https://www.georgiapower.com/company/plant-vogtle/vogtle-news/2019-articles/georgia-power-vogtle-unit3-moves-closer-to-operation-as-integrated-flush-begins.html
|
https://www.georgiapower.com/company/plant-vogtle/vogtle-news/2019-articles/georgia-power-vogtle-unit3-moves-closer-to-operation-as-integrated-flush-begins.html
]
Birders in Corvallis will also no doubt have heard of NuScale Corporation
(majority-owned by Fluor Corporation) which just received preliminary licensing
for a small-scale, modular reactor design (see [
https://www.fluor.com/projects/nuscale-power-small-modular-reactor-nuclear ;|
https://www.fluor.com/projects/nuscale-power-small-modular-reactor-nuclear ] ;).
Whether this is a good thing, a bad thing, or an in-between thing for the
environment, considering the challenges posed by global climate change, is a
separate topic. But the plain fact is that nuclear power development is far
from dead in this country, and even here in Oregon.
Returning to natural gas, this is an industry that has been killing birds on a
massive scale. The recent revision to the USFWS' interpretation of the concept
of "take" regarding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (another midnight action by
the defeated and outgoing Trump administration, on January 7th):
[
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/07/2021-00054/regulations-governing-take-of-migratory-birdsw
|
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/07/2021-00054/regulations-governing-take-of-migratory-birds
]
was expressly to protect the oil and gas industries from claims of MBTA
violations, when birds die due to negligent oil/gas-field practices such as
leaving drilling-mud tanks uncovered.
For every story of birds dying at large-scale solar power facilities, I could
give you one of birds being killed by routine gas-field practices such as
flaring "excess" gas:
[
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/thousands-of-songbirds-killed-at-lng-plant
|
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/thousands-of-songbirds-killed-at-lng-plant
]
But that's not the limit of the environmental disruption caused by the oil and
gas industry. As a result of the Bakken shale boom, huge areas of grassland
habitat in western North Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana have been fragmented by a
dense network of roads and "drilling pads," right up to the edge of Teddy
Roosevelt National Park where the nighttime sky is now lit up by gas flares.
The attached JPG shows just a random example of what that looks like from
above.
Bottom line, the natural gas extraction industry is just as destructive to
birds and bird habitat as the claims made here about large-scale solar and wind
power. Reliance on gas versus wind/solar (or even nuclear) power furthermore
will accelerate rather than slow human-caused global climate change, which
impacts birds globally. How many albatross or shearwater nesting colonies on
atolls will be drowned by rising sea levels?
Or how many coral reefs that provide their breeding-season food will be
"bleached" by ocean acidification, which is driven directly by rising
atmospheric carbon levels? Even if you don't "believe" in CO2-driven climate
change because you don't believe the complicated computer models, the process
by which carbon dioxide drives carbonate reef dissolution is as simple as CO2 +
H2O + CO3 --> 2HCO3. Or in words: carbon dioxide + water + carbonate (reef) -->
bicarbonate (dissolved).
So no, natural gas is not any kind of long-term solution. It's environmentally
destructive in its production, and it's environmentally destructive when it's
used. The best we can say is that it's cleaner than coal, so it may make sense
to use as a "bridge" while phasing out coal.
--
Joel Geier
Camp Adair area north of Corvallis
Attachment:
shaleextractionfield.jpg
Description: JPEG image
Attachment:
oceanacidification.png
Description: PNG image
