Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Necessary to sustain a wasteful culture and economy, I suppose. CoopersDad Jun 2024 #1
Well stated. Thank you. quaint Jun 2024 #2
Many current solutions to humanity's environmental problems only PufPuf23 Jun 2024 #19
So, no other tree-less space in the desert was available? Fiendish Thingy Jun 2024 #3
What's the point of classifying them as "protected" KarenS Jun 2024 #4
'renewable energy' is protested at the 'local level' virtually every place that it is proposed stopdiggin Jun 2024 #5
It's difficult for me to equate NIMBY concerns with protected trees and tortoises. quaint Jun 2024 #6
understand that stopdiggin Jun 2024 #11
I mostly agree. quaint Jun 2024 #13
which, without doubt, has some basis in fact stopdiggin Jun 2024 #14
It is a little absurd to refer to an unreliable mass and land intensive... NNadir Jun 2024 #9
I'm not a particular fan of solar either stopdiggin Jun 2024 #12
My son is on the front lines of new nuclear systems. NNadir Jun 2024 #15
Federal NEPA and California CEQA permitting regulations have been weakened to PufPuf23 Jun 2024 #16
I don't understand the Sites Reservoir project. quaint Jun 2024 #17
Nah. I think I'm alright - with both my take - and yours. stopdiggin Jun 2024 #18
This after so many have already been destroyed by wildfire JoseBalow Jun 2024 #7
Reading the history of the approval was upsetting. quaint Jun 2024 #8
Okay, this is some seriously fucked up shit... GiqueCee Jun 2024 #10
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»California»Solar project to destroy ...»Reply #7