I came across an interesting article on Green Inc. today. Two environmental organizations, the Audubon Society and the Natural Resources Defense Council, have developed a map of 13 states in the Western United States which highlights areas where potential alternative energy development could adversely affect the environment.
If wind farms or massive solar plants were built in the areas highlighted in these maps, it could pose a threat to endangered or threatened species. This may be a challenge for companies that require large areas of land in order to develop wind farms, solar farms, geothermal plants, etc. On the one hand, they want to developing alternative energy, reduce greenhouse gases and protect the environment. On the other hand, the very act of creating their plants or wind farms could potentially be disastrous for endangered species.
The article led me to the question of the distinction between environmentalists and individuals who support clean technology. At what level is it okay to support alternative technology, though it may disrupt the habitats of many species?