Contributing Monkie G Living Staff Monkies
Published on December 3, 2007
In Fort Collins Colorado, renewal is a way of life” at least according to their town motto. However, recent debates have emerged between local politicians and environmentalists regarding two projects the city is currently working on. The goals of both projects are to produce a new form of zero-carbon energy, but while one process has earned residential approval, the other one hasn’t. But neither one of them seems particularly green in its execution.
The most controversial of the two projects would utilize a uranium mine a fact that has never pleased the townspeople and massive drilling to extract nuclear-generated electricity. Local politicians have united in expressing their concerns about using the mine as part of the project, given the potential contamination of the city’s water supply.
Local enviornmentalist Dan Bihn, according to an article in the New York Times, believes people should hear the complete plan for the uranium mine before jumping to conclusions. The newspaper quotes Mr. Bihnwas as saying, “I think nuclear needs to be on the table […] and we just can’t emotionally react to it.” Yet, strangely enough, when asked for his emotional reaction to the issue, he replied, “Deep down inside, my emotional reaction is that we should never do this.”
Even stranger, the more popular project is called AVA Solar and proposes to utilize new technology to create solar panels using cadmium, a hazardous metal thought to cause cancer.
Which begs the bigger question of whether or not communities should potentially sacrifice local green in their attempts to achieve global green.
The debate is currently going on in Fort Collins, and will no doubt be popping up in other areas.
Read the New York Times article here.