I love mowing my lawn. There is something so gratifying in crisp lines, where the blades of my mower meet the blades of grass to achieve a proper height. I relish in the marathon battle between man and weed, mentally planning out the next operation of fertilizer whilst enduring the blazing heat or racing the storming clouds. Though I am a novice, caring for my home and my lawn is special to me, as it is my property. Though millions of others around the world do it, I find mowing a lawn to be something equivalent to driving a car—distinctly American.
So, you can say I was more than upset when I heard Colorado politicians want to tell me how I get to do it. I was pissed.
In Colorado, the reality of lawn care could soon include the need for an extension cable. Recently, the Regional Air Quality Council (RAQC) has recommended banning gas-powered lawn equipment in nine of Colorado’s largest counties, raising concerns about practicality and personal freedom. While the goal of reducing smog over the Front Range is commendable, we must carefully consider the effects of such a ban. This includes evaluating our energy infrastructure, managing battery waste, and potential risks associated with centralized power control.
Let’s talk about the energy infrastructure issue first. The proposed ban assumes that Colorado has enough electricity infrastructure to support the widespread use of electric lawn equipment. However, Colorado often relies on out-of-state energy to meet its electricity demands, as its in-state generation needs to catch up. Unless we want to experience blackouts and power shortages like they do in California, the RAQC’s recommendations will put a heavy burden on the system when millions of electric lawnmowers, snow blowers, and trimmers switch away from gas.
Speaking of batteries, that’s a whole other problem. Supporters of the gas-powered ban seem to overlook the challenges of managing battery waste. Battery-powered equipment uses lithium-ion batteries, which come with their own environmental concerns. While they’re promoted as a greener alternative, our environmentalists colleagues are foe of telling us that lithium mining has devastating impacts on local environments:.. when it’s convenient. There’s also a question of whether an electric vehicle is truly greener than a conventional one. Setting aside these problematic concerns, what happens when batteries reach the end of their lifespan? Does Colorado have the capacity to dispose of and recycle millions of batteries? Does the state have enough space for processing plants or landfills, especially when there’s already a shortage of real estate ? It’s like trading one environmental problem for another. As Thomas Sowell wisely said, there are no perfect solutions, only trade-offs.
But the most concerning aspect of this proposed ban is the idea of relying on a central entity for our energy choices. When I was growing up in Colorado, we prided ourselves on our moderate politics. Despite the stark regional differences between places like Sterling and Boulder, we managed to maintain a culture of moderation. Policy decisions took into account economic interests and personal liberties.
However, centralizing energy would largely abandon that tradition. When a central authority dictates where our energy may come from, we surrender our ability to make choices that align with our personal preferences and values. Coloradans risk becoming dependent on energy czars and local electric utility executives. With a gas-powered vehicle or mower, I can go and mow as I please. Under this proposed plan, those decisions would be made for me by the literal power brokers.
Instead of burdening our energy infrastructure, exacerbating battery waste concerns, and relinquishing control to a centralized authority, let’s redirect our efforts towards promoting cleaner alternatives while preserving the joys of lawn care. By emphasizing education, incentives, and research into more efficient gas-powered equipment, we can strike a balance between environmental responsibility and personal autonomy.