Skip to content
Subscribe

Environmental math: more solar panels = fewer eucalyptus trees

Published:

It is well known that some green programs fail.  Solyndra, the Fremont-based solar panel manufacturer forced into bankruptcy last month is one high profile example.  Meanwhile, energy efficient transportation projects such as California’s proposed high-speed rail struggle to get off the ground.

But, a solar installation in Martinez just may take the cake for pure irony on an environmental level.  The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has ordered Main Street Power to halt all work on construction of a major green energy project after they discovered that the company had gutted a stand of 100 eucalyptus trees near the entrance of a popular regional park near Pinole in order to make way for an installation of solar panels.  The public outcry has been deafening.

Exactly whose idea it was to trade 100 old growth eucalyptus trees for a stand of newly constructed solar panels is hard to determine because Main Street Power failed to show up at the hearing called by the Board of Supervisors to explain themselves.  According to the Contra Costa Times:

“The board wants Main Street Power to redesign the solar panel field and accommodate the restoration of a tree buffer between the jail and the regional park, but the firm has said the county must pay for it.”

The county is skating on thin ice here because it apparently approved the entire scheme, tree removal and all, back in 2010 when it let the contract.  Of course, all the civil servants involved in those nefarious negotiations have since left the county’s employ (and may well be lobbying for the tree removal industry for all we know).  It’s unclear whether this entire brouhaha will end up being settled in or out of court – if at all.

Apparently, the rest of the county staff was satisfied to use laissez-faire management techniques on the project and hence were caught by surprise when large chunks of greenery began to disappear from the Contra Costa landscape.  The county’s sincere hope was to move rapidly into a green environment, save some $500,000 over the 20-year lifespan of the contract, and claim bragging rights as a green county.

The only thing green the county may now have to brag about is the Dr. Seuss-style egg on its face, thrown there by angry citizens.  In a classic expression of too little too late, Supervisor Karen Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill exclaimed, "I'm appalled.  I cannot fathom why someone thought they could cut down all those trees."

“It’s outlandish,” said Supervisor Mary Nejedly Piepho of Discovery Bay, in a moment of bureaucratic decisiveness. "I have had it with this company!"

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Environmental math: more solar panels = fewer eucalyptus trees

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us