Do you support Michigan potentially clearing 420 acres of forest to make room for a solar farm?

[llorando]

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2520002/michigan-to-save-the-planet-by-clearing-420-acres-of-forest-for-a-solar-farm

Yes

No

[MrOracle]

No, that's absolutely insane.

Solar is going to give a poor return in Michigan in general. It's too north and the weather isn't suitable. I'm a big supporter of solar IN PLACES WHERE IT WORKS WELL, but Michigan isn't it. Really, solar isn't viable in New England or the Mid-West due to weather.

What that area needs are MODERN nuclear plants. All of the US's nuke plants are 50s and 60s designs, and we've made massive improvements to those designs in 60 years, but we haven't built a new nuke plant since the early 70s. That's crazy. Nuke plants are actually the cleanest form of energy there is (this is true of even the old designs that create nuclear waste - newer designs are nearly waste-free).

Solar is fantastic for the southwestern states. It works and works well. But we need to be using common sense, and putting solar in Michigan is NOT common sense.

[malarkey]

I don't think it's a huge deal to clear 420 acres of forest for a project, especially if you are purposely harvesting timber as a resource, but Michigan isn't exactly a great place for solar. Some areas of the country are more suited for utilizing solar and others are not. Even in Florida there are times when it is not ideal due to cloud cover. I can't imagine it would be all that efficient in any of the northern states. It seems like a huge waste of resources.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

That sounds like an ultimate benefit all around. If you do it right, the entire state could be powered by that singular farm. That’s a really cool idea.

[llorando]

It kinda isn't, the benefits of the solar farm doesn't outweigh negative impact of destroying over 400 acres of forest. I've seen someone comment on another site, this will have a huge environmental impact, and a more environmental friendly solution was rooftop solar panels.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Rooftop solar panels require the permission and usually payment from the homeowner, the government won’t do that

[purplepoppy]

Stick them on farmland. Animals love sheltering under the panels.

[jshm2]

Yes. That is the right decision as less forest fire risk and not to mention having to manage such an estate already is a heavy cost to the state.

Your average hillbilly isn't going to understand the costs that go into maintaining forests. Obviously it's not a case of sending in the bulldozers like they do in the Amazon, and a lot of species work will be done beforehand. So assume 50% of that land will need to be left alone.

Solar is a decent way ahead compared to something fucked up like nuclear. Now that the USA can't dump it's waste off the coast of Somalia like it used to!

[slickrick6600]

Man down in in NC they have cleared thousands of acres for solar fields in my county alone, how is it helping when your killing trees? Solar panels can go to hell. Nuclear power is clean efficient power, the amount of waste that comes out of the reactors is so small. It doesn’t hurt the environment when it’s sealed up properly. The us hasn’t built a nuclear plant in ages because it’s impossible to get the permits and stuff for the project

[MannMitAntworten]

They should plow Detroit instead. Forest produce oxygen or have the “greenies” forgotten that?

[llorando]

Not all of us greenies, just the ones out to make money. Someone mentioned on another site, a better and more environmentally friendly idea would be to take the money being used for the solar farm and invest in rooftop solar panels.

[MannMitAntworten]

…. and they would be correct.

[exitseven]

Yes, but only if the solar farm has private financing and has posted a bond worth enough to dispose of the hardware once it's useful like has expired.

[Anonymous]

There are more desolate parts of the country where they could do that and that have much more sunshine than Michigan.

[Anonymous]

Do they have to destroy nature? Can’t they choose another site?

[llorando]

Apparently yes. Someone mentioned on another site, a better idea, was to take the money being used for the solar farm and invest that money in rooftop solar panels. Can't have that, no money to be made in people generating their own electricity.

[lorenzomichael]

I don’t know about that but I love my Michigan Wolverines GO BLUE!

[Kelly6]

@llorando thats stupid as hell 🤣

[llorando]

It is in my opinion. A more environmentally friendly option would be to invest the solar farm money in roof top solar panels, but there is no money to be made in people generating their own power.