Beware environmental 'flavours of the month' | By David Seymour

Contrary to the conceits these three romantic and collective actions entail, the real advances in harmonizing the relationship between our species and our planet are often (and disappointingly perhaps?) piecemeal and incremental.

They are also often commercially-driven. For example:

Containerized and refrigerated shipping are commercial innovations that have allowed us to literally bridge the gap between the most efficient places to grow food and people's preferred places to consume it; better farming techniques mean that we can feed more people without needing to clear more land, and a look at the General Electric website shows how smart grid technology will streamline electricity distribution by balancing demand -- so long as millions of people don't insist on switching their lights in unison to make "statements."

Unlike the environmental-flavour-of-the-month movements, these innovations are highly effective but completely unromantic.

The real call to action should be for smarter, evidenced-based, incremental green policy instead of hijacking a good cause for cultural fads.

Solar Power May Be Eco-Friendly. But Some in California Call It a Blight - TIME

But could this politically backed, popularly supported solar surge spiral into eco-disaster? That's what some say is happening to the Carrisa Plains, a sparsely populated swath of arid, sunny and relatively cheap land in eastern San Luis Obispo County where three of the world's largest solar plants ever proposed are under review. Together, the Topaz Solar Farm, California Valley Solar Ranch (both photovoltaic projects) and the Carrizo Energy Solar Farm (a solar thermal operation) would provide energy to nearly 100,000 Golden State homes, but only by covering roughly 16 square miles of the ecologically sensitive plains with solar panels and industrial development.

Question: Are there any quality-of-life issues for plants and animals when their habitat is completely covered by solar panels?