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 without sufficient supporting context (or even references to other sources) to make it really useful.