Wednesday, December 18, 2024


Murdering Birds to Save the Climate?




 ecember 18, 2024

Image by Andrew Schultz.

Like many roads that cut through Wyoming, the highway into the town of Rawlins is a long, winding one surrounded by rolling hills, barbed wire fences, and cattle ranches. I’d traveled this stretch of Wyoming many times. Once during a dangerous blizzard, another time during a car-rattling thunderstorm, the rain so heavy my windshield wipers couldn’t keep pace with the deluge. The weather might be wild and unpredictable in Wyoming’s outback, but the people are friendly and welcoming as long as you don’t talk politics or mention that you live in a place like California.

One late summer afternoon on a trip at the height of the Covid pandemic, I stopped off in Rawlins for lunch. There wasn’t a mask in sight, never mind any attempt at social distancing. Two men sat in a booth right behind me, one in a dark suit and the other in overalls, who struck me as a bit of an odd couple. Across from them were an older gentleman and his wife, clearly Rawlins locals. They wondered what those two were up to.

“Are you guys here to work on that massive wind farm?” asked the husband, who clearly had spent decades in the sun. He directed his question to the clean-cut guy in the suit with a straight mustache. His truck, shiny and spotless, was visible out the window, a hardhat and clipboard sitting on the dashboard.

“Yes, we’ll be in and out of town for a few years if things go right. There’s a lot of work to be done before it’s in working order. We’re mapping it all out,” the man replied.

“Well, at least we’ll have some clean energy around here,” the old man said, chuckling. “Finally, putting all of this damned wind to work for once!”

I ate my sandwich silently, already uncomfortable being in a restaurant for the first time in months.

“There will sure be a lot of wind energy,” the worker in overalls replied. “But none of it’s for Wyoming.” He added that it would all be directed to California.

What?!” exclaimed the man as his wife shook her head in frustration. “Commiefornia?! That’s nuts!”

Right-wing hyperbole aside, he had a point: it was pretty crazy. Projected to be the largest wind farm in the country, it would indeed make a bundle of electricity, just not for transmission to any homes in Rawlins. The power produced by that future 600-turbine, 3,000 MW Chokecherry and Sierra Madre wind farm, with its $5-billion price tag, won’t, in fact, flow anywhere in Colorado, even though it’s owned by the Denver-based Anschutz Corporation. Instead, its electricity will travel 1,000 miles southwest to exclusively supply residents in Southern California.

The project, 17 years in the making and spanning 1,500 acres, hasn’t sparked a whole lot of opposition despite its mammoth size. This might be because the turbines aren’t located near homes, but on privately owned cattle ranches and federal lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Aside from a few raised eyebrows and that one shocked couple, not many people in Rawlins seemed all that bothered. Then again, Rawlins doesn’t have too many folks to bother (population 8,203).

Wyoming was once this country’s coal-mining capital. Now, with the development of wind farms, it’s becoming a major player in clean energy, part of a significant energy transition aimed at reducing our reliance on fossil fuels.

Even so, Phil Anschutz, whose company is behind the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre wind farms, didn’t get into the green energy game just to save the climate. “We’re doing it to make money,” admits Anschutz, who got the bulk of his billion-dollar fortune from the oil industry. With California’s mandate to end its reliance on fossil fuels by 2045, he now sees a profitable opportunity, and he’s pulling Wyoming along for the ride.

Since 1988, Wyoming has been the country’s top coal-producing state, but its mining has declined steeply over the past 15 years, as has coal mining more generally in the U.S. where 40% of coal plants are set to be shuttered by 2030. In addition to the closed plants, the downturn in coal output has resulted largely from cheap natural gas prices and the influx of utility-scale renewable energy projects. Wyoming’s coal production peaked in 2008, churning out more than 466 million short tons. Today, its mines produce around 288 million short tons of coal, accounting for 40% of America’s total coal mining and supplying around 25% of its power generation. Coal plants are also responsible for more than 60% of carbon dioxide emissions from the country’s power sector. As far as the climate is concerned, that’s still way too much.

The good news is that the U.S. has witnessed a dramatic drop in daily coal use, down 62% since 2008, and few places have felt coal’s rapid decline more than Wyoming, where a green shift is distinctly afoot. Despite being one of the country’s most conservative states (71% of its voters backed Donald Trump this year), Wyoming is going all in on wind energy. In 2023, wind comprised 21% of Wyoming’s net energy generation, with 3,100 megawatts, or enough energy to power more than 2.5 million homes. That’s up from 9.4% in 2007.

The Winds of Change

On the surface, Wyoming’s transition from coal to wind is laudable and entirely necessary. When it comes to carbon emissions, coal is by far the nastiest of the fossil fuels. If climate chaos is to be mitigated in any way, coal will have to become a thing of the past and wind will provide a far cleaner alternative. Even so, wind energy has faced its fair share of pushback. A major criticism is that wind farms, like the one outside Rawlins, are blights on the landscape. Even if folks in Rawlins aren’t outraged by the huge wind farm on the outskirts of town, not everyone is on board with Wyoming’s wind rush.

“We don’t want to ruin where we live,” says Sue Jones, a Republican commissioner of Carbon County. “We can call it renewable, we can call it green, but green still has a downside. With wind, it’s visual. We don’t want to destroy one environment to save another.”

Energy from the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre wind farms will also reach California via a 732-mile transmission line known as the “TransWest Express,” which will feed solar and wind energy to parts of Arizona and Nevada as well. To be completed by 2029, the $3-billion line will travel through four states on public and private land and has been subject to approval by property owners, tribes, and state, federal, and local agencies. The TransWest Express passed the final review process in April 2023 and will become the most extensive interstate transmission line built in the U.S. in decades. As one might imagine, the infrastructure and land required to construct the TransWest Express will considerably impact local ecology. As for the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre wind farm, it might not encroach on residential neighborhoods, but it does risk destroying some of the best natural wildlife habitats in Wyoming.

Transmission towers connecting thick high-voltage power lines will stand 180 feet tall, slicing through prime sage-grouse, elk, and mule deer habitat and Colorado’s largest concentration of low-elevation wildlands. The TransWest Express will pass over rivers and streams, chop through forests, stretch over hills, and bulldoze its way through scenic valleys. Many believe this is just the price that must be paid to combat our warming climate and that the impact of the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre projects, and the TransWest Express will be nothing compared to what unmitigated climate chaos will otherwise reap. Some disagree, however, and wonder if such expansive wind farms are really the best we can come up with in the face of climate change.

“This question puts a fine point on the twin looming disasters that humanity has brought upon the Earth: the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis,” argues Erik Molvar, a wildlife biologist and executive director of the Western Watersheds Project, a Hailey, Idaho-based environmental group. “The climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis are of equal importance to humans and every other species with which we share this globe, and it would be foolhardy to ignore either in pursuit of solutions for the other.”

Molver is onto something often overlooked in discussions and debates around our much-needed energy transition: What consequences will these massive renewable energy projects have on biodiversity and the wild creatures that depend on these lands for survival?

Is It Really Clean If It Kills?

Biologists like Mike Lockhart, who worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for more than 30 years, claim that these large wind farms are more than just an eyesore and will negatively affect wildlife in Wyoming. Raptors, eagles, passerines, bats, and various migrating birds frequently collide with the blades, which typically span 165 feet.

“Most of the [Wyoming wind energy] development is just going off like a rocket right now, and we already have eagles that are getting killed by wind turbines — a hell of a lot more than people really understand,” warns Lockhart, a highly respected expert on golden eagles.

In a recent conversation with Dustin Bleizeffer, a writer for WyoFile, Lockhart warned that wind energy development in Wyoming, in particular, is occurring at a higher rate than environmental assessments can keep up with, which means it could be having damning effects on wild animals. Places with consistent winds, as Lockhart explains, also happen to be prime wildlife habitats and most of the big wind farms in Wyoming are being built before we know enough about what their impact could be on bird populations.

In February 2024, FWS updated its permitting process under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, hoping it would help offset some of wind energy’s effects on eagles. The new rules, however, will still allow eagles to die. The new permits for wind turbines won’t even specify the number of eagles allowed to be killed and companies won’t, in fact, be out of compliance even if their wind turbines are responsible for injuring or killing significant numbers of them.

Teton Raptor Center Conservation Director Bryan Bedrosian believes that golden eagle populations in Wyoming are indeed on the decline as such projects only grow and habitats are destroyed — and the boom in wind energy, he adds, isn’t helping matters. “We have some of the best golden eagle populations in Wyoming, but it doesn’t mean the population is not at risk,” he says. “As we increase wind development across the U.S., that risk is increasing.”

It appears that a few politicians in Washington are listening. In October, California Representative Jared Huffman and Pennsylvania Representative Brian Fitzpatrick introduced a bipartisan bill updating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. The legislation would authorize penalties of up to $10,000 per violation for harm to birds. Still, congressional staffers tell me it’s unlikely to pass, given the quiet lobbying efforts behind the scenes by a motley crew of oil, gas, and wind energy developers.

The Department of Energy projects that wind will generate an impressive 35% of the country’s electricity generation by 2050. If so, upwards of 5 million birds could be killed by wind turbines every year. In addition to golden eagles, the American Bird Conservancy notes that “Yellow-billed Cuckoos, Golden-winged Warblers, and Kirtland’s Warblers are particularly vulnerable. Wind energy poses special risks to endangered or threatened species such as Whooping Cranes and California Condors, since the loss of even a few individuals can have population-level effects.”

And bird kills aren’t the only problem either. The constant drone of the turbines can also impact migration patterns, and the larger the wind farm, the more habitat is likely to be wrecked. The key to reducing such horrors is to try to locate wind farms as far away from areas used as migratory corridors as possible. But as Lockhart points out, that’s easier said than done, as places with steady winds also tend to be environments that traveling birds utilize.

Even though onshore wind farms kill birds and can disrupt habitats, most scientists believe that wind energy must play a role in the world’s much-needed energy transition. Mark Z. Jacobson, author of No Miracles Needed and director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, notes that the minimal carbon emissions in the life-cycle of onshore wind energy are only outmatched by the carbon footprint of rooftop solar. It would be extremely difficult, he points out, to curtail the world’s use of fossil fuels without embracing wind energy.

Scientists are, however, devising novel ways to reduce the collisions that cause such deaths. One method is to paint the blades of the wind turbines black to increase their visibility. A recent study showed that doing so instantly reduces bird fatalities by 70%.

Such possibilities are promising, but shouldn’t wind project creators also do as much as possible to site their energy projects as close to their consumers as they can? Should Wyoming really be supplying California with wind energy when that state already has plenty of windy options — in and around Los Angeles, for example, on thousands of acres of oil and brownfield sites that are quite suitable for wind or solar farms and don’t risk destroying animal habitats by constructing hundreds of miles of power lines?

Wind energy from Wyoming will not finally reach California until the end of the decade. As Phil Anschutz reminds us, it’s all about money, and land in Los Angeles, however battered and bruised, would still be a far cheaper and less destructive way to go than parceling out open space in Wyoming.

Wind Is Still a Resource

In that roadside cafe in Rawlins, the two workers paid their bill and left. I sat there quietly, wondering what that couple made of the revelation that the wind farm nearby wasn’t going to benefit them. Finally, nodding toward the men’s truck as it drove away, I asked, “What do you think of that?”

“Same old, same old,” the guy eventually replied. “Reminds me of the coal industry, the oil industry, you name it. The big city boys come and take our resources and we end up having little to show for it.”

Shortly after lunch, I left Rawlins and made my way two hours north to the Pioneer Wind Farm near the little town of Glenrock that began operating in 2011. I pulled over to get some fresh air and stretch my legs. As I exited the car, I could hear the steady hum of turbines slicing through the air above me and I didn’t have to walk very far before I nearly stepped on a dead hawk in the early stages of decay. I had no way of knowing how the poor critter was killed, but it was hard to imagine that the hulking blade swirling overhead didn’t have something to do with it.

This piece first appeared on TomDispatch.

JOSHUA FRANK is co-editor of CounterPunch and co-host of CounterPunch Radio. His latest book is Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America, published by Haymarket Books. He can be reached at joshua@counterpunch.org. You can troll him on Bluesky @joshuafrank.bsky.social


Foiling Rupert Murdoch: Project Harmony Misfires


 December 18, 2024
Facebook

Photograph Source: World Economic Forum – CC BY-SA 2.0

The case that began on September 17 concerning the control of the Murdoch family trust has been decided.  It saw a dicey attempt by one of the most ruthless newspaper and media moguls in history to limit the influence and control of his publishing and broadcasting empire after his death.  The relevant parties?  The children, of course.

The central instrument of the dispute was a trust, intended as an irrevocable instrument born from the divorce of Rupert Murdoch and his second wife, Anna Torv Murdoch Mann.  Anna’s wish was that Rupert and the children share control over the businesses of the imperium.  Any new contenders – namely those arising from Rupert’s union with Wendy Deng – would also be shut out, though not financially.  This meant that Prudence, Elisabeth, Lachlan and James would each have an equal voting share concerning company decisions after their father’s croaking.

Power and its exercise instill a permanent restlessness.  Rupert was unlikely to leave the trust, whatever its status, alone.  Patriarchs of such character are bound to have their favorites, angling for those who advance their concerns and interests while marginalizing perceived threats and inadequate helpers.  Over time, Lachlan seemed to push his way through to the front as one most likely to continue the father’s media vision.  According to The New York Times, it was he who ultimately pushed matters to alter the trust in mid-2023 given rattling moves from Elisabeth Murdoch.  At a subsequent meeting of the trust, Rupert stated that, while he loved his brood, “these companies need a designated leader and Lachlan is that leader”.

The other children had also stirred the patriarch’s sense of peace, much of it arising from the role played by Fox News and News Corp.  James, for instance, is seen as the most “troublesome” by Lachlan, given his grumblings over the Fox News Corp besmirching of climate change science and other unenviable causes.  The result was Project Harmony, an attempt to cut out the other children from making decisions on the future direction of the media imperium.  This change of heart was always going to be difficult to realize, given the limits imposed on any unilateral changes made by the “settlor” in Nevada law.

In June, Nevada’s Probate Commissioner gave Rupert a streak of hope.  Changes could be made to the trust subject to the proviso that they be done in good faith and for the sole benefit of the heirs.  The father’s sly contention was that granting Lachlan full control would end up advantaging all the children.  The tribal chieftain had spoken.

This month, Commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr. made his sharp assessment: he was far from impressed.  “The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch’s favor after Rupert Murdoch’s passing so that the succession would be immutable.  The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up.”  Both Rupert and Lachlan had acted in bad faith in engaging what Gorman regarded as a “carefully drafted charade” intended to favor Lachlan’s position of power.

James, Elisabeth, and Prudence, keeping up appearances, supplied a statement to The New York Times welcoming the Commissioner’s finding “and hope that we can move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members.”  This seems unlikely, given a few contingencies.  For one thing, the commissioner’s finding is to be passed on to the Probate Court, requiring a district judge to ratify or reject it.  Either way, this will permit the defeated party to appeal the ruling.  The lawyers on all sides are swooning.

Media vultures in search of carrion see this ruling as remarkable – probably more so than it is.  A former Murdoch editor turned snow white, Eric Beecher, argues that the leadership of both New Corp and Fox “is now deeply uncertain as a result of the commissioner’s ruling.  The non-Murdoch shareholders – who own more than 80% of each company – have woken up to the news that their chairman is likely to lose when his father dies”.  Shareholders and markets, Beecher goes on to remind us, “hate uncertainty.”

This certainly presents a problem for the Murdoch family.  Whatever their disagreements, the cash incentive has always been sovereign in power.  Principles have been treated as baubles and luxuries.  Fox News, beastly as it is, remains a sacred cow in the profit stakes. For over 20 years, it has raked in the viewer numbers.  It has an enviable primacy over others in the swill bucket of cable news, seizing some 70% of the market in November.  Competitors such as CNN and MSNBC have seen their audiences fall since the November election.

That said, the model Fox News breathes and feeds on has an inbuilt obsolescence.  Alternative avenues were cultivated by the Trump campaign in 2024, most notably through podcast formats offered by such figures as Joe Rogan.  Subscription television is on a precipitous decline in the US.  Lachlan’s siblings may end up seeing the very outlets of Daddy Rupert they despise yet profit from atrophy over time.  No one should shed a tear for that fact.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com