Is our climate fight killing the environment? A case for smart from the start planning

To reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet the goal of keeping global average temperatures below a 1.5 degrees Celsius increase, dramatic changes to the transportation and energy sectors are required (IPCC 2022). Transitioning energy generation away from fossil fuels and shifting from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles will require more land to meet the demand for minerals and energy production (Sonter et al. 2020, Wu et al. 2023). Simultaneous to the demands from the energy and transportation sectors is the continued need to conserve intact landscapes to maintain biodiversity (Primm et al. 2014, Diaz et al. 2019). Given the ecological interdependence of the biosphere and the Earth's climatological systems, biodiversity conservation and climate action are strongly interrelated (Kim 2004). Achieving the energy transition while maintaining biodiversity is critically important for the climate, nature, and people. Maintaining biodiversity requires that we conserve land and waters, preserve landscape connectivity and migration corridors, and protect biodiverse hotspots. In the present article, we use the phrase smart from the start to describe an approach that will allow society to balance the development of energy infrastructure projects designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining the conservation of biodiversity. We urge everyone, including communities, land managers, politicians, investors, corporations, unions, trade organizations, researchers, developers, and utility providers to take a holistic approach to the energy transition—where analyses are needed to understand the cumulative impacts on people and biodiversity and advance projects with the fewest impacts on both. Achieving a balanced outcome may require a shift away from the paradigm of centralized energy generation on previously undisturbed lands in natural landscapes, known as greenfields. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, governments at various levels have mandated renewable portfolio standards that require utility companies to deliver a certain percentage of renewable energy by specific dates, often 2035 or 2050. However, implementation and the renewable energy projects themselves suffer from many issues such as regulatory burdens, local reluctance to support the development of utility-scale generation facilities, a lack of opportunities for grid interconnection, an increase in the energy infrastructure burden placed on rural and indigenous communities, limited resources such as water for implementation, utility company paradigms of central energy generation, and a lack of economic incentives for distributed solar in urban areas. Furthermore, utility-scale solar and wind require large landscapes with generating rates of approximately 2.8 and 49 megawatts per hectare, respectively. Comparing the energy production per unit area from wind and solar with that from natural gas and coal generation is difficult because of the extractive processes and different land-use intensities. However, data suggest that, for equivalent energy generation, wind requires 13.6 times and 7.9 times more land area than coal and natural gas do, respectively (Lovering et al. 2022), whereas ground-mounted solar requires 1.9 times and 1.1 times the land area required for coal and natural gas, respectively (Lovering et al. 2022). The large footprints are often installed on greenfields and require additional transmission infrastructure—which also has extensive linear footprints. With increasing demands for raw materials to build solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, transmission lines, and other infrastructure, additional mineral and metal extraction will be required (Hodgkinson and Smith 2021). Although coal extraction may be reduced, the mining and extraction of materials necessary for the energy transition are geographically distinct from coal belt areas. Without proper planning, the increase in disturbed lands and habitat loss from renewable energy deployment will be substantial (e.g., Wu et al. 2023). To transition the transportation sector away from fossil fuels, a dramatic increase in electric vehicle production is required (Williams et al. 2021), along with concomitant changes to electrical infrastructure and an expansion of the network of charging stations. The increasing demand for both electric vehicles and infrastructure requires increasing mineral and metal extraction to meet production and build-out requirements. For example, electric vehicles use more lithium, cobalt, rare earth minerals, and copper than combustion engines do (International Energy Agency 2022). Although reduced demand for gas-fueled vehicles will likely result in a reduction of oil wells and drilling, demand for minerals and metals will increase mining production globally, which often has large land footprints and consumptive water use that can negatively affect biodiversity and adjacent communities (Sonter et al. 2020, Parker et al. 2024). Net-zero carbon dioxide energy systems will require rapid and deep emissions reductions in all sectors and the deployment of carbon dioxide reduction and low-emissions hydrogen to ensure that warming is limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius (IPCC 2022). These nascent technologies require large electricity loads, materials inputs, water use, and storage and transportation infrastructure (Chatterjee and Huang 2020). The demand for land area and water to extract and process materials and build the infrastructure associated with the energy transition will increase the pressure on biodiversity and will require thoughtful balancing of conservation and ecosystem integrity. Despite relatively strong regulatory processes in developed countries, renewable energy, transmission, and extraction are often deployed piecemeal and without consideration of holistic landscape conservation, which can have negative consequences for biodiversity (e.g., Diaz et al. 2019). A piecemeal approach to the energy transition begs the question: Are we killing the environment in our fight against climate change? Balancing an energy transition in the face of biodiversity loss that is 1000 times greater than background levels (Primm et al. 2014) is a major challenge. The biodiversity costs for the business-as-usual paradigm of centralized energy generation on greenfields will perpetuate habitat loss and mass extinction (Primm et al. 2014), leading to negative feedback loops of further ecosystem degradation and a loss of critical ecosystem services that people depend on (Chapin III et al. 2000, Cardinale et al. 2012). Furthermore, continued development on greenfields adjacent to communities can fuel opposition to projects, increase marginalization, and delay the energy transition. Smart from the start planning can accelerate the energy and transportation transition, including critical mineral extraction, while maximizing conservation and community values (figure 1). We believe it is possible for the energy transition to occur rapidly and not at the expense of biodiversity. It is possible to deploy enough renewable energy to reach net-zero without dramatically compromising conservation (Wu et al. 2023). Siting renewable energy on disturbed lands or on lands with low conservation value can lead to shorter permitting times, fewer community conflicts, and reduced costs to project proponents (Dashiell et al. 2019). In addition, there is significant space for urban solar development on rooftops and parking lots and opportunities for gravity energy storage in residential and commercial buildings. Overcoming the paradigm of centralized energy generation on greenfields and implementing a more distributed energy model will require regulatory changes and support from corporations and utilities. A comprehensive smart from the start approach also includes increasing energy efficiency to reduce the overall demand placed on energy and infrastructure systems. Using a smart from the start approach to the energy transition can find the balance among infrastructure, people and communities, and biodiversity to reduce conflict and increase the speed of the energy transition. We use the phrase climate infrastructure to refer to the infrastructure (electricity, mines, pipelines, roads, and wells) associated with deploying renewable energy, battery storage, alternative fuels, and direct air carbon capture and storage. We recommend seven strategies as a starting place for implementing a smart from the start approach to the energy transition: Coordinate decision-making through land and resource planning; strictly adhere to the mitigation hierarchy by prioritizing impact avoidance, then minimizing and mitigating impacts that cannot be avoided; incentivize and prioritize new energy and transportation development and critical minerals extraction in low impact and low conflict areas; eliminate barriers for expanding renewable energy generation and increasing land-use and energy efficiency in our built environment; develop dedicated funding for disturbed land remediation with renewable energy as the defined end use; incentivize the circular economy and recycling of critical minerals and metals to eliminate or reduce the need for additional mining; and promote development that does not increase the stress on surface or groundwater resources (figure 2). Taking a smart from the start approach that integrates conservation, communities, and low impact siting is required to balance the impacts from the energy transition and to ensure that we do not save ourselves from climate change while at the same time accelerating biodiversity loss. We propose seven strategies for developing and implementing climate change solutions while maintaining biodiversity using a smart from the start approach. Michael J. Clifford ([email protected]) is a conservation scientist, Tanya Anderson is a project manager, both are at The Nature Conservancy, in Las Vegas, Nevada, in the United States. Jaina Moan is the director of external affairs, Mickey Hazelwood is the Nevada conservation director, and Laurel Saito is the strategy director for water, all at The Nature Conservancy, in Reno, Nevada, in the United States. Peter Gower is the Climate and Renewable Energy Program director for the Western US and Canada Division of The Nature Conservancy, in Reno, Nevada, in the United States. Sophie S. Parker is the director of science for climate and land use at The Nature Conservancy, in Los Angeles, California, in the United States.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.