A VIEW TO DIE FOR

A worker installs panels in the array, which will be about the size of a football field. (Christina House/For The Times / September 19, 2010). A photo from the LA Times article about the installation of 1400 large solar panels on the hills above Griffin Ave.

The project on property belonging to the Christian Science Convalescence Home has been temporarily halted as public outrage over the ugly scaring of the hills is discussed further.

The owners of the old folks home have all the permits and legal rights to complete the project but is the eyesore and desecration one of the remaining undeveloped hillsides going to be allowed? At what price does solar energy and energy savings to the owners have on not only the aesthetics of the community but also the future of the birds and animals that reside in those hills?

Solar energy is a viable and resourceful way to combat the oil industry and it’s dirty poisonous effects on Mother Nature but does this justify the destruction of nature and habitat that is becoming so rare in Los Angeles nowadays?

As a roofing and construction professional of many decades I would ask why we in the USA don’t mandate the use of roofing materials that use solar collector cells integrated into the membrane as is so popular now in Europe.

Imagine if almost every roofing surface in Los Angeles was covered with a solar energy efficient material that turned solar energy into a power source, on most days peoples electrical meters would run backwards and ugly solar collector panels and giant wind turbines wouldn’t be ruining the aesthetics of the landscape.

2 thoughts on “A VIEW TO DIE FOR

  1. “The owners of the old folks home have all the permits and legal rights to complete the project but is the eyesore and desecration one of the remaining undeveloped hillsides going to be allowed?”

    yes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.