It’s difficult to think of anything more foolish than destroying a state jungle to create a thermal land. Yet, that’s exactly what Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources ( DNR ) is moving ahead with, as it plans to clear 420 acres of state forest near Gaylord, Mich., for solar energy development.  ,
Advertisement
This project is” as the DNR faces dwindling income from hunting and fishing permissions, and Michigan falls behind in developing clean energy quickly enough to risk not meeting a crucial state weather target – 100 % clean electricity by 2040,” according to MLive.
Obviously, cutting down thousands of trees is the solution to achieving absurd and random climate goals. I can recall being taught about the ominous effects of deforestation in the Amazon forest as a child. Obviously, if you slap some renewable sections on the cleared area, it’s immediately cool. Who knew?
This decision raises important questions about the economic trade-offs as well as the underlying motivations behind such a ridiculous policy.
How much more proof is required to establish that the alternative energy sector is not genuinely driven by environmental concerns? Installing solar panels on cleared rainforests, which is a crucial tool for carbon sequestration and biodiversity habitats, is the definition of counterproductive. Forests are crucial in reducing carbon emissions, but the State seems unwilling to sacrifice this element of natural environment defense in favor of the benefits of a “green” project.
And let’s not believe that the DNR is indifferent to these trade-offs. Authorities, including Scott Whitcomb, expect pushback, and for good reason. This is a glaring paradox to Michigan’s personal Healthy Climate Plan, which advises against land-use changes that increase greenhouse emissions. The DNR insists that because of its close proximity to a significant authority distribution line, which lessens the need for additional infrastructure, the project is worthwhile. In other words, advantage is being prioritized over economic dignity.
Advertisement
There is already compelling evidence that this task won’t have an impact on the culture.
Recent medical research has focused on deforestation and the promotion of solar energy. According to research from both Harvard University and Chinese researchers, the loss of carbon-dioxide snatching trees for solar installations results in a gross boost in greenhouse gas emissions, the air pollutants that contributes to the warming weather problems.
That means it’s counter-productive to the environment struggle to clear cut forests, yet for renewable energy sources which don’t motor greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. That’s just how great trees are at turning carbon-dioxide into hydrogen through natural sunlight.
This strategy is little short of a policy disaster in terms of economic and coverage. Cutting back on forests to make room for solar fields isn’t really misleading; it also exposes the flawed logic of so-called “green” initiatives that disregard the larger environmental impact. Trees are unavoidable for diversity and carbon absorption, and sacrificing them for the sake of magnification affects the very climate targets these tasks claim to support.
If Michigan were certainly committed to ecology, it would promote repurposing already-developed area or exploring less dangerous solar energy options. Otherwise, the state is gambling apart its natural history for short-term political wins and economic comfort. This isn’t just shortsighted, it’s irresponsible.
Advertisement
Such efforts raise serious questions about the motivations behind the politicians who support these initiatives and the natural energy industry. Are they motivated by true environmental issues, or is this another example of revenue and politics masquerading as improvement? Michigan’s people deserve better than clear claims and misguided policies. This program demands nothing less than firm, outspoken opposition.
