Wild places and energy extraction can coexist | The Salt Lake Tribune
Get news, sports and politics alerts

Click here to manage your alerts
Wild places and energy extraction can coexist

By Tom Wharton

| The Salt Lake Tribune

First Published Feb 13 2012 06:04 pm • Last Updated Feb 13 2012 08:06 pm

I’ve been thinking about energy and where it comes from lately.

We flip on a switch and our electronic gadgets, lights and appliances come to life. We drive into the gas station and fill up our tanks, seldom thinking about where our fuel originated or how it was refined. Turn on a tap and clean water appears, almost as if by magic.

Photos
Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

As a lover of wildlife and open spaces who considers himself an environmentalist, I know it is easy to be a hypocrite.

We don’t like coal-fired power plants because they pollute the air. Nuclear? There’s no place to put the waste. And what about earthquakes or natural disasters? Natural gas plants? The wells fragment wildlife habitat and leave ugly scars on the land. Hydroelectric power might be clean, but what about all the natural rivers reservoirs have ruined? We want cheap gas, but don’t want to allow new refineries to be built and oil wells ruin views and fragment wildlife habitat.

Are wind-powered turbines the answer? Perhaps, but they sure take up a lot of space and cause some types of birds all sorts of harm. Solar panels require acres of our desert landscapes.

And, of course, there are all those unsightly power lines.

I also fear that most of us are gluttons. We want all the cheap energy that can be produced. We talk the environmental talk, but God forbid that power or gas companies ask for a rate increase to help pay for some of the regulations that might mitigate environmental damage caused by production. Woe to the political party in power if gasoline rises to over $4 a gallon. At that point, it’s damn the environmental consequences. We want our energy now. And we want it cheap.

Many fail to worry about future generations. We seem perfectly willing to use up all the coal, pump as much oil as possible, and leave radioactive waste for our kids and grandkids to worry about. We don’t care if all the remaining wild places are gobbled up by energy development. And we give little thought to using non-renewable resources now and saving few of them for later.

Somehow, somewhere, someone needs to discover some sort of balance between the need for cheap energy and the future. We need both energy and wild places. And we need plans to restore land once it is mined out or the oil and gas fields quit producing.

For example, we need to identify "viewsheds" from famous overlooks as well as national parks or special places such as Desolation Canyon on the Green River and exempt them from oil and gas development, at least until other leases are played out and these resources are sorely needed.

story continues below
story continues below

Important wildlife habitat and corridors needs to be taken into consideration when new fields are planned. We might need to recognize that there are some places where wildlife needs to take precedence over energy, at least for awhile.

And those who make land use decisions must realize that tourism plays a big role in Utah’s economy, especially in some rural parts of the state, and should not be taken for granted. Millions come here from all over the world to experience the beauty of the Colorado Plateau, the emptiness of the Great Basin and the craggy peaks of the Wasatch Mountains.

Difficult, complex land-use decisions must be made, actions that don’t lend themselves to sound bites from politicians looking to score cheap political points. They require compromise among all parties, who must be willing to work together instead of fight each other in court and in the halls of Congress and the legislature.

I plead guilty. I like cheap gas, electricity and water. But I also want to leave tracts of wild places for my kids and grandchildren to enjoy and explore. I want clean water for fish, wetlands for birds and open range for deer, elk and antelope. Maybe I should be willing to pay a little more.

I don’t know if it is possible to have both energy and wild places. But it would sure be nice for politicians, planners, producers and environmentalists to sit down for a serious discussion about the future.

Tom Wharton is an outdoors and travel columnist. Reach him at wharton@sltrib.com or 257-8909.



Copyright 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Reader Comments
Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, click the red "Flag" link below it.
See more about comments here.
What are those badges some users have next to their names?


Staying Connected
Jobs
Shopping
Contests and Promotions
Affiliates and Partners