The Cape Wind project, which was going to be the US's first offshore wind farm, was famously killed by wealthy and powerful people worried about their views with environmental causes as a pretext. I think that bureaucratic review could be much better than the current case of "anybody wealthy enough can sue to stop the project" but that would have required spending money spinning up the department when the law was introduced and relying on lawsuits from the public looks free.
EDIT: And of course recently fossil power interests were able to stop some power lines to bring hydro electricity in from Canada.
Exactly this. Every project is going to impact the environment. The end goal of a risk assessment is not to bring the environmental risk to zero, it is to bring it down to an acceptable level given the benefits of the project.
Exactly this. Every project is going to impact the environment. The end goal of a risk assessment is not to bring the environmental risk to zero, it is to bring it down to an acceptable level given the benefits of the project.
I think getting at this type of issue is specifically what I wished the article had done more of. It's easy to say "Well, environmental regulations are causing the problem." Which I guess is good to know, but the real important part is what's the next step or how could things improve.
Otherwise, it comes across as "The problem is that environmental regulations exist."
Blocking infill development with CEQA? You need to say how much more driving will happen as a result.