Craig1969SS
Well-Known Member
And lithium batteries exposed to water don't do any better.
Trump signs executive orders to advance Keystone XL, Dakota Access pipelines
- Thread starter JaJaJaJa
- Start date
whitebb2727
Well-Known Member
We should be doing more than that. I find it crazy that an acre of hemp produces four times the paper pulp as an acre of trees. Hemp replaces o2 at a greater rate also.
They don't want to hear it. It can't run 5,000 homes so fuck it.
That's a horrible attitude to have. Same with saying China pollutes more so fuck it.
We should lead by example.
Rrog
Well-Known Member
Show us poll data that is recent. Popularity fell badly. Pipes leak
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
If 18 hours of the day can be powered by solar, that reduces dependency on fossil fuels by 75% until battery technology advances.
Noone is saying quit fossil fuels suddenly and sharply, but a 75% reduction in their use is a HUGE step in the right direction.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Just make sure the juice you use comes from certified non fossil fuel sources. There's a lot of coal and gas fired power plants out there.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
He's at least consistent; he's made a complete asshat of himself everywhere he's gone!
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Except for its not elemental lithium, is it?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Assuming a majority are still behind building the pipeline, are people's rights and valid concerns of spills in sensitive areas less important than a popularity poll?
I recall outrage by people living in the sparsely populated middle america when it was pointed out that Trump lost the popular vote by millions of votes and the idea of the electoral college was challenged in debate. The constitution was written to give the nod towards preventing the majority from dominating minorities. And so, the electoral college win by Trump make him a minority president. But valid nonetheless. Are you now saying that because a majority support for this pipeline (if true), this justifies building it and court challenges should be quashed? Minority rights should be overrun by the majority? Right wingers want it both ways, I guess.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The skink is pretty cute.
Big_Lou
Well-Known Member
Craig1969SS
Well-Known Member
Dude why do you have to be that way? Condescending and bitter. I'm for green renewables, it's just that your pimping to cut off oil now this year and switching us over to renewables. It's never going to happen that way. We can choose electric providers where I live, I chose a company that provides 100% renewable. I pay more for it but it's my way of doing my bit to help out. I pay 13.5 cents Kwh. I could have gone with a non renewable and paid 10 cents but I chose not to. The batteries are for YOUR usage of stored power where 12v is inverted to AC that u can use . Windmills solar panels etc are for personal usage with any excess feeding back to the grid.
Craig1969SS
Well-Known Member
Leading by example like you suggest will get us stepped on then stepped over. Even when we're majority renewable how are you then going to convince India Malaysia china South America etc to stop pillaging the earth for easy energy ? Once they have a rolling economy they going to derail that train because the example setters ask them to? No they will demand subsidies or We'll get the big middle finger.
whitebb2727
Well-Known Member
That's the problem. Countries keep meeting over what to do and wait for someone else to do it.
Everything you just said doesn't change the fact we need to lead by example.
You don't have to store it either. Yes it would be nice but we could still use solar to reduce daytime peak usage.
Some of those places are doing things to go green.
Part of the problem we have here in the US utility companies lobbying against renewables. Like Florida it is illegal for solar panels. Is that not crazy?
Last edited:
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
It is a problem that does not currently have an economical of environmentally sound solution. There are other methods that can provide a continuous flow of on demand electricity until one is developed. Pumping the Earth dry of petroleum is a short sighted policy with no solution.
What materials would it require? Vision in our society and top leadership - which is in short supply lately. Who will pay for it? Mexico. How much does it cost? What is the cost of continuing to use fossil fuels until they are gone? It will be less than that. Reliability? Yes, and flexibility too. Those are both good things.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
I am pre-tuned to asshats here in politics. You may not have deserved it.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
visajoe1
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the reply, this I can appreciate much more than a gif. I didnt expect you to have the answers to any, just throwing them out there.
The hurdle that environmentalists need to clear, and its a very tough one, is quantify what x and y equal. They need to answer for every $10B spent, (insert something earth related) improves by (insert measurement). Apply this to the greenhouse gases or global warming theories. If we spend as a country, $10B, how much will greenhouse gases go down? Or how much cooler will the earth get? This cant be answered because one country doesnt constitute the earth. Yes, there are global initiatives, but their reach isnt very far, nor their effect (on a global scale, with global numbers). We're just told, if we do it, we will see positive results.
But, isnt that what Bernie Madhoff told his "clients?" Invest with me, and you'll be rich. He couldnt quantify anything (which is why it all blew up in the Recession) because he was stealing and needed more and more cash to throw into his never ending pit. How is the environmental story different? I'm not saying trash the place. I'm saying the sky is not falling and the earth will always win over us despite what we do. The environmentalists need to sell a product to continue to get funding. Its their job, I get it. I still recycle though
Lets keep this dialogue goin!
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
You can't just buy results, you need to invest in the prerequisite technology.Thanks for the reply, this I can appreciate much more than a gif. I didnt expect you to have the answers to any, just throwing them out there.
The hurdle that environmentalists need to clear, and its a very tough one, is quantify what x and y equal. They need to answer for every $10B spent, (insert something earth related) improves by (insert measurement). Apply this to the greenhouse gases or global warming theories. If we spend as a country, $10B, how much will greenhouse gases go down? Or how much cooler will the earth get? This cant be answered because one country doesnt constitute the earth. Yes, there are global initiatives, but their reach isnt very far, nor their effect (on a global scale, with global numbers). We're just told, if we do it, we will see positive results.
But, isnt that what Bernie Madhoff told his "clients?" Invest with me, and you'll be rich. He couldnt quantify anything (which is why it all blew up in the Recession) because he was stealing and needed more and more cash to throw into his never ending pit. How is the environmental story different? I'm not saying trash the place. I'm saying the sky is not falling and the earth will always win over us despite what we do. The environmentalists need to sell a product to continue to get funding. Its their job, I get it. I still recycle though
Lets keep this dialogue goin!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
55,000 gallons of gasoline just spilled into the susquehanna river in pennsylvania. this was done by the same company that wants to build the dakota access pipeline.
http://www.wgal.com/article/55000-gallons-of-gasoline-spill-into-susquehanna-river/7027298
http://www.wgal.com/article/55000-gallons-of-gasoline-spill-into-susquehanna-river/7027298
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Cleanup should've been easy.
*lights a match*
At least it wasn't as bad as the Bowling Green massacre.