I dont have a membership card but I suspect I belong to the liberal left intelligencia. As such, I thought this article was right on the mark.

We continue to depend on burning a massive amount of fossil fuel (oil and coal) and we NEED TO CHANGE. But the same lefties who urge change cannot agree on what to change to.

We dont like nuclear energy. Even though it has no emissions, it plays into our distrust of everyone paranoia and those 5 people in Nevada dont want the waste.

We dont like hydro because the dams damage nature and fish habitat.

We dont like wind because the towers look bad and apparently kill very slow-flying, near-sighted birds.

Solar is great but we dont want to pay for it.

So that leaves us with pie-in-the-sky ideas like wave energy.

Well, folks. It is time to pick a poison.

Green Projects Generate Splits in Activist Groups

By GREG HITT

December 13, 2007

Wall Street Journal

On Capitol Hill, the Audubon Society is leading the fight to increase production of climate-friendly power. So why are Audubon enthusiasts battling a wind farm that could help meet that goal?

For one thing, there are trout in nearby streams, which activists say are at risk from chemical and sediment runoff from construction of 30 turbines, each soaring about 400 feet -- taller than the Statue of Liberty. Then there are the bats and hawks, which might be puréed by the giant blades that would catch the wind gusting along the Allegheny Mountains of Western Pennsylvania.

"They're enormous," says Tom Dick, a retired veterinarian who founded the local Audubon chapter. "When you start looking at this, it's like, 'hell, this is not right.'"

Even as Americans become convinced they need to change the way they power their lives, the environmental community is splintering over how to do that. Does ethanol promote clean fuel or destroy the rural landscape? Is emission-free electricity worth turning mountains into wind farms?