Home subscribe manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Opinion
Aug. 21, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

ERIN NEFF: State must do more than just talk about renewables

ERIN NEFF
MORE COLUMNS

Why is it that the hottest air in renewable energy proposals always seems to come from a politician outside Nevada?

Even as UNLV hosted the National Clean Energy Summit this week, Nevada was still largely talking about its potential. As the Olympics prove night after night, all the talking, preparation and inherent bountiful skills only go so far if the rest of the world is already out there doing it.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: Professor needs to get with the program
  • LETTERS: Washington loves rewarding failure
  • FROM OUR READERS: We can't do worse than country's current leadership
  • LETTERS: Trickle-down economics is dead
  • EDITORIAL: Tip jar
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Shall we save the economy ... or the government?
  • LETTERS: Don't expect district to cut waste
  • EDITORIAL: Sending the right message
  • EDITORIAL: A tiny bit of good news?
  • EDITORIAL: 'A cautionary tale'



    • Yes, Nevada is the "Saudi Arabia" of the United States. We have the resources -- sun, air, biomass. And we have public support for clean, green living.

    But T. Boone Pickens wants the world's largest windfarm to be built in the Texas panhandle.

    New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants the Big Apple to be the big windy city, trying to put the "Second" in Chicago's other nickname.

    Of course, for many Las Vegans, just having everyone show up here for a big environmental symposium was a bolt of credibility. Then reality sets in. Nevada businesses bilked the state out of green-energy tax breaks by making some parts of already-planned construction adhere to national standards. The greenness inside these casinos however, with 24-7 smoking and no natural light, is still all left on the felt.

    Maybe Nevada politicians will be inspired by the vision of Bloomberg or the bottom-line sense of Pickens.

    The last big vision thing to come from a Nevada pol was Oscar Goodman's support of an 80,000-seat football stadium.

    Over the 10 years that I've lived here, I've watched Nevadans digest a steady environmental diet of no nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain coupled with the promise and hope of good green jobs and lower energy costs. We've been told about our seemingly limitless potential -- all those days of sun and wind and geothermal features that would be the envy of the world.

    But it's the lesser-ordained places that are proving potential doesn't matter as much as simply doing it.

    Some Nevadans may know about the state of gaming in Atlantic City, what with so many of New Jersey's casinos owned by operators here. But few know Atlantic City has wind turbines churnin' along the coast.

    Atlantic City -- our second city -- has beat us to the environmental punch.

    McCarran International Airport officials bleat a lot about airline industry woes. But they could be saving a little money if they put up some wind turbines like Boston's airport has. Apparently they don't interfere with radar, after all.

    Bloomberg may be a lame duck with lamer prospects of national office, but it takes a bit of courage to try to redesign the skyline of a city still arguing about what should be built at 9/11's Ground Zero.

    "When it comes to producing clean power, we're determined to make New York the No. 1 city in the nation," Bloomberg said in Las Vegas.

    Bloomberg's vision sees wind turbines not just off the coast of Long Island, but on top of bridges and skyscrapers, too. The New York of the future may have as many skyscraper farmers as it does hedge fund managers.

    Will the Las Vegas of the future have as many photovoltaics as it does celebrity photos? Right now it's just Oscar and his dream of an annual Super Bowl.

    I'm sure the stadium won't have turbines given how the wind could impact the passing on the field.

    The turbines might even impact betting lines. In such a case, green energy would once again lose to the greenbacks.

    The biggest exception to the "what if" scenarios in Nevada is the Nevada Solar One project just outside of Boulder City. If you're driving to Searchlight or Laughlin, you might think it's some kind of a mirage. Thankfully, that project is not too good to be true.

    It's 400 acres, cost $270 million and emits zero greenhouse gases. The parent company, Acciona Solar Power, says it is the third-largest such plant in the world.

    Nevada Sen. Harry Reid spearheaded this week's energy summit and thinks it is likely Las Vegas will host another forum like it next year. Maybe that's the best news Nevada can hope for on the renewable front.

    By next year, we might actually see a competition to find out which properties can truly go the greenest. Maybe the energy summit will require the host hotel to do more than just ask guests to re-use towels.

    And maybe there will be plans for turbines at the CityCenter project. Maybe the Luxor could replace some of its cool black glass with photovoltaics.

    Hey, some tourists wouldn't mind cooking.

    The Stratosphere could really kick it up to heights previously unknown. It always feels windy up there anyway. Turbines would look as natural as the people who already pay good money to hang off the thing.

    The potential in Nevada, even in Las Vegas, may be limitless.

    This week's symposium at UNLV might someday be credited as visionary. Let's hope by then we're not playing catch up to all those people with less wind potential but more hot air.

    Contact Erin Neff at eneff@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-2906.



    Leave Your Comment 8 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Jim Nance wrote on August 21, 2008 11:22 AM: Renewables still need a lot of development in technology.

    Wind and Solar are not reliable 24/7 generators of power.

    For each potential megawatt that they provide one still needs to have a stand-by megawatt of reliable energy from coal, natural gas and nuclear.

    Solar and wind could help reduce fuel cost during peak demand of summer. That is why solar makes more sense than wind.

    Storging energy is very expensive.

    The bring new Solar One plant southeast of Las Vegas has a storage system. But is a very expensive system. It is generating power at a price that is 240% above current prices.

    If we rush these technologies into production with developing them more then are we ready to deal with the potential doubling of our power bill?

    Doubling our power bills will reduce the consumer spending power and increase the cost of all goods produced in the USA. Obviously, people would lose jobs and our standard of living would be impacted.


    TimeRanger wrote on August 21, 2008 09:57 AM: "I'm sure the stadium won't have turbines given how the wind could impact the passing on the field."

    Newsflash - These turbines USE the wind, not create it.

    The towers for the Hoover Dam bypass bridge would be an ideal location to install wind turbines - besides the ever-present breeze that funnels up through the canyon, it is in very close proximity to "the grid". Businesses and housing projects that offer covered parking could easily use solar panels to provide the shade.


    Jack wrote on August 21, 2008 09:48 AM: Why is it that the hottest air in renewable energy proposals always seems to come from a politician outside Nevada?
    Interesting Erin, why don't you ask DINGY HARRY, your boy?!?! After all with one of the largest solar energy initiatives killed by his plans to add EIGHT BILLION IN TAXES we might look in his direction.
    As for your gushing over the Solar Energy Synopsium, you are right, a lot of hot air, especially from the "cute" president all you dems voted in, CLINTON WHO DID ALMOST NOTHING TO ENHANCE SOLAR POWER FOR EIGHT YEARS. Now that hes just a civilian with a big mouth, he talks about it alot. Or your boy the global saviour AL GORE WHO USES TWENTY TIMES THE AVERAGE FAMILY ENERGY USE IN A YEAR!


    John Galt wrote on August 21, 2008 09:18 AM: My car and my house don't run on "feel good" energy. I need gas and electricity.

    Don't rush into renewable energy until it is competitive with conventional sources. Keep the pilot projects going, but none of those sources are really ready for prime time just yet.

    Nuclear needs to be an option. Congress should junk the Yucca Mountain plan and scrap the law that prevents us from recycling and reusing nuclear fuel.


    KDR81 wrote on August 21, 2008 08:43 AM: Erin are you heartless?

    Think about opportunity costs. You're willing to spend $675,000 an acre to produce solar energy plants that produce a few megawatts of power.

    That money could be better spent in a host of areas. Look, if Al Gore is right about the dangers of global warming, the is nothing we can do to stop it. Even eliminating cars all together in the U.S. won't stop rising temperatures based on Gores models. We're screwed.

    We're better off helping the worlds poor (of which, poverty is a bigger threat to humanity).


    Judy wrote on August 21, 2008 08:07 AM: br - Other forms of energy are not fads. They are necessary at this point. And you think they are only cost efficient if subsidized? We subsidize oil now to the tune of the cost of this war in Iraq. How is that for subsidy? Subsidies usually only last long enought to get something off the ground, make it common but not oil. When wind and solar power projects become more common and are cheaper to install the subsidy will go away.
    Erin - good column again!


    br wrote on August 21, 2008 07:13 AM: Careful Erin. You are drooling again.

    Better look beyond the hype of any fad. TB Pickens is pushing wind turbines because he and his Pelosi have a business relationship that will get them a lot of government subsidy money. Other sharks in the water smell the same blood. Dingy Harry is getting his share one way or the other. All that would be ok if it wasn't based on government susidies. Viable technologies will attract support without Reid/Pelosi pushing it.

    By the way, Erin, how are you and your vehicle doing on the corn diet(ethanol)?




    0u812 wrote on August 21, 2008 05:39 AM: Erin, have you asked Harry how eviromental his homes and bussiness office are. How about his vehicles, are they ran with out gas & oil? Harry likes to talk about others and what others should do, how about Harry???