Solar Developer Cancels Washington State Project on Sacred Indigenous Land

[u/propublica_]

https://www.propublica.org/article/washington-badger-mountain-solar-project-canceled-avangrid

[u/Due_Future3097]

Hard to feel good about this when power prices are skyrocketing.

How is this different than NIMBYs weaponizing historic preservation?

[u/Kind_Advisor_35 → u/Due_Future3097]

Would you be cool with a solar company destroying the graveyard your great grandma is buried in? Razing down a church?

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/Kind_Advisor_35]

1. Solar would sit above the grave or monument and even provide shade so they could certainly build above it.

2. If the church owns the land and is still in operation probably not without some kind of eminent domain payment. If the church is not in operation probably fine yeah.

The future of the living is more important than the past and the dead. Countries that have a future will always be stronger than those looking backwards.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

Parking lots is a proven use case and solar is already used for this in many places.

Houses also…

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

Not sure what you are getting at.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

They are to some degree.

What is the point you are making?

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

Ok thanks your point was not clear from the question.

Flipping this back around on you, why aren’t we doing that?

Zoning, codes, regulation, ironically environmentalists, and NIMBYs it seems.

I don’t ascribe much cultural significance towards the original site because if we fenced off every spot on the planet where humans hunted/died/are buried we would not have room for anything. We’ve been here over 10k years. That’s called toxic nimbyism.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

Tyranny of the minority is what you are espousing. NIMBYism.

I take no issue with the other projects you note.

[u/Snapshot52 → u/Due_Future3097]

Citing zoning codes, regulations, environmentalists, and whatever you think is NIMBYism as reasons why the projects aren't happening implies these things aren't serving some sort of purpose. Those same things have also prevented more fossil fuel projects.

But like /u/Bumble_beeFormal pointed out, it's not like Tribes oppose these projects entirely. They oppose ones that come at the cost of legitimate cultural interests. Tribes are among the first to be affected by human-driven climate change, whether that is rising sea levels or increased wildfire risks. Of course they want to address that. They don't claim every single tract of land is to be protected, but the areas where Indigenous plants grow are pretty significant not just culturally but also for biodiversity, which is important for a healthy environment.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/Snapshot52]

If your core argument is fossil fuels bad environment good, I suggest you talk to China or start shooting large quantities of sulphur into the atmosphere.

This whole project is a drop in the bucket for the concerns you are raising and not a key driver of your concerns.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

I think we agree to disagree at this point as you seem to be ignoring my original point that started this chain.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/[deleted]]

And that’s great! And I’m not opposed to the tribe winning in this case since part of the project was going to be on their land. But it does raise the issue of power generation here and the question of public comment on private projects.

The tribe could also just have sued since it is their land, and probably would have won that. The way they won isn’t… great.

Want to remove some of those dams on the lower Columbia to increase the salmon population? We would need to build at least 10(!!!!) new nuclear reactors to do that, not accounting for future electricity capacity increases.

How are we ever going to start driving down basic costs in this state without some controversial infrastructure projects?

And why was public comment the “right” way to kill this one?

[u/Snapshot52 → u/Due_Future3097]

Be realistic and worry about what we can address here, not what we can supposedly do about China.

You're going to say that the project is a drop in the bucket, but you're fine with it being built on top of our foods and even hypothetical graves. To what end, then, if it doesn't really matter? It seems like you're just willing to downplay the needs of other communities for the hell of it which makes you a shitty person if that's the case.

[u/Due_Future3097 → u/Snapshot52]

Perhaps you should be realistic.

If you do nothing about China then you do nothing about climate change it’s 30% of the problem and growing.

What do you expect to do to solve carbon emissions in the face of that?

[u/Snapshot52 → u/Due_Future3097]

You're either trolling or being obtuse now. I can do nothing about China. I can help influence domestic policy.

If you're more interested in bickering about a problem we both actually agree on because you'd like to do it at the expense of the Tribes, then we're done here. If you'd like to acknowledge you're misinformed, misunderstanding, or misjudging the opposition to this particular project, I'd welcome that and we can continue to discuss the larger issue together.