This story left me wondering if there's a political angle that wasn't covered. This is the Bush administration, after all. Reason for delay is allegedly for environmental impact review, but it stymies the solar industry at a time of critical need for such solar projects. I wish the reporter had addressed the angle of politics, and at least explored if there's an angle of helping the oil and coal industries by squashing alternative energy.

Good overall assessment of solar energy. One thing overlooked when considering sources of energy like solar and wind is the vast amount of land they require in relation to the amount of energy they currently produce. Near Palm Springs, California is a huge wind farm with hundreds of giant windmills, casting a pall of ugliness over the entire area--as do wind farms everywhere they're located. Their noise, as well as their up to 330' diameter triple spinning blades have completely altered birdlife and wildlife in that desert. Evidently there are no ‘free lunches’ even for alternative energy sources.

Story highlights important issue in alternative energy, ie: bureaucratic set-backs that cook impede growth in the solar industry. Gives good description of the kinds of environmental studies The Bureau of Land Management wants to conduct, but quotes principles from fledgling solar companies who voice concern both about the project delays and the expiration of solar credits that may not get renewed through Congress. Article could use more emphasis on the comparisons between TOTAL environmental impact of a thermal solar plant in the desert and a coal-fired plant in the midwest.

Original story and very relevant. It seems odd that with the rising price of oil and the possible depletion of the world's oil supply happening within the next few decades, that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management would call for a moratorium on building new solar facilities for the next two years; I would like to see further investigation into why this is so. The article includes points of view from all sides represented, but sources could be quoted better instead of having what they say summarized; quotations are always much more compelling because they are the actual words spoken.

An interesting story about using public land to provide solar energy. The question is why is the plan not done now? The article indicates oil and gas drilling is occuring. Do oil and gas have the same extensive environmental studies completed?

Interesting article that raises important issues on the potential environmental impacts of solar plants on public lands. Additional information on the cost of generating energy at solar plants vs the cost of generating solar energy on roof tops would have been helpful in looking at cost benefit issues. We already have miles of flat roof space, would that be a viable way to generate energy or do we need these plants? Or if every house had solar panels would it be like cell towers, one is not too bad but when you look at the cumulative impact of 1000s of them, it becomes an environmental issue and a blight on the landscape.

If the reader knows nothing about these issues this story will not fully inform. The differences between photovoltaic and concentrating are critical. PV plants can be small, placed on top of buildings, locally funded and have very little environmental impact. The huge concentrators have the problem of any huge construction. Regardless of that, these are viable ways to go forward with much less problem than nuclear. There is no such thing as "wasteland" so there is no place that big things can be built that don't bother someone or some thing. Windmills have had to evolve because earlier ones devastated birds, were seen by some as ugly (or worse) and often could not be located where most needed. That is getting better and ... More »

The bureaucratic maze created by environmentalists to block everything turns around and bites them. Solar is fun, but its a niche technology and unreliable due to clouds and night. Only will work well in sunny places. We have to limit government subsidies until it becomes competitive, if ever.

beyond the story itself, this certainly illustrates broken Govenment that can't get the most obvious thing done, even when it is already started, and in fact doesn't seem to be worried about stopping it and going backward.

Certainly an important topic and an important bit of news, but it is flawed by a lack of detail or supporting context. And it's already obsolete. "millions of acres" -- what does that mean, 2 million or 200 million? How do the lands in question compare quantitatively with other issues, e.g. forest fires, new development, agriculture turning organic, total areas available, etc.? "Others warned the bureau against becoming mired in its own bureaucratic processes on solar energy, while parts of the West are already humming with new oil and gas development." How do the oil and gas development compare to the issue at hand other than that they are "humming"? I want to know more specifics. Seems to me like so much mainstream rhetoric ... More »