Does being green mean you want trees and nature left alone?  Or does it mean you're an advocate for low-pollution energy?  What happens when these two virtues clash?

It's a question at the heart of the debate over whether to allow 40-story wind turbines in state forests in Western Maryland.

And now there's this. Here is a fascinating story about a California couple that is facing criminal prosecution because they refuse to cut down trees in their yard that are shading a neighbor's solar panels. The fines could be substantial -- up to $1,000 a day. They are pictured above, from a story in the San Jose Mercury News.

The trees were there first -- but they had the misfortune to grow (as trees sometimes do) so tall their shadows fell across the solar panels on the neighbor's porch.  Now the local prosecutor is going after them, and has taken them to court.

Behind all this is a little-known California law, written by former Assemblyman Chuck Imbrecht, a Ventura Republican, as a way to guarantee, amid the energy crises of the 1970s, that people who installed solar panels wouldn't see a drop in their investment from nearby trees, according to the newspaper. It's never been enforced before.

The law does not apply to trees or shrubs that were there before the solar panels were installed. But - and here's the key distinction - it does apply to existing trees and shrubs that later grew big enough to shade the solar panels, the paper reports.

Any thoughts on this?