The Environment

[Landlord]

I agree with you in principle but it isn't that easy.

"We go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard."

 

[knapplc]

jaws - yeah. I can pull up links if you want me to, or you can google "fossil fuel campaign donations" and you'll find results for most candidates from either side of the aisle. They're protecting their industry, and I understand that, but I'm more concerned with my environment than their profits.

 

[jaws]

I agree with you in principle but it isn't that easy.

"We go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard."

Are you saying that you are volunteering your back yard for a nuclear power plant?

 

[jaws]

jaws - yeah. I can pull up links if you want me to, or you can google "fossil fuel campaign donations" and you'll find results for most candidates from either side of the aisle. They're protecting their industry, and I understand that, but I'm more concerned with my environment than their profits.

I understand with what you are saying and I am fine with government funded research into the technologies. I don't care to have the government subsidize an entire industry.

 

[Landlord]

I mean, if I had a backyard, maybe! What happened to solar freaking roadways though, man?

 

[knapplc]

I agree with you in principle but it isn't that easy.

"We go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard."

Are you saying that you are volunteering your back yard for a nuclear power plant?

Does it really have to be that extreme?

What about MSRs or Liquid Thorium?

Asking "Do you want a nuclear power plant in your back yard" kind of jumps to the fringiest side of the conversation, doesn't it?

 

[knapplc]

jaws - yeah. I can pull up links if you want me to, or you can google "fossil fuel campaign donations" and you'll find results for most candidates from either side of the aisle. They're protecting their industry, and I understand that, but I'm more concerned with my environment than their profits.

I understand with what you are saying and I am fine with government funded research into the technologies. I don't care to have the government subsidize an entire industry.

I'm cool with the government subsidizing Dairy a little more. Milk is stupid expensive!

But yeah, some government funding is cool, but it shouldn't all be propped up by the government. But I'd be good with spending equal amounts on Green as we do subsidizing fossil fuels. $20 billion a year for alternative fuels would give us one hell of a jumpstart.

 

[ColoNoCoHusker]

jaws - yeah. I can pull up links if you want me to, or you can google "fossil fuel campaign donations" and you'll find results for most candidates from either side of the aisle. They're protecting their industry, and I understand that, but I'm more concerned with my environment than their profits.

In my area, Encana has been prospecting and installing NG wells like crazy last few years. A lot of my neighbors installing solar kept getting contacted by the county about code complaints. Turns out, the field supervisors were told to identity properties with solar as they were out inspecting the rigs or wells. Someone from the company would then call in a complaint. Completely petty practice just trying to inconvenience individuals/government departments for having solar.

 

[jaws]

I agree with you in principle but it isn't that easy.

"We go to the moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard."

Are you saying that you are volunteering your back yard for a nuclear power plant?

Does it really have to be that extreme?

What about MSRs or Liquid Thorium?

Asking "Do you want a nuclear power plant in your back yard" kind of jumps to the fringiest side of the conversation, doesn't it?

He brought up nuclear so I responded. It doesn't have to be nuclear power but anything that creates electricity on a large scale will have an environmental impact. If I wouldn't want something in my neighborhood, why would I ask someone else to put it in their neighborhood?

 

[ZRod]

jaws - yeah. I can pull up links if you want me to, or you can google "fossil fuel campaign donations" and you'll find results for most candidates from either side of the aisle. They're protecting their industry, and I understand that, but I'm more concerned with my environment than their profits.

I understand with what you are saying and I am fine with government funded research into the technologies. I don't care to have the government subsidize an entire industry.

I'm cool with the government subsidizing Dairy a little more. Milk is stupid expensive!

But yeah, some government funding is cool, but it shouldn't all be propped up by the government. But I'd be good with spending equal amounts on Green as we do subsidizing fossil fuels. $20 billion a year for alternative fuels would give us one hell of a jumpstart.

But another way to keep it cheap is... foreign (often illegal) labor...
Also that subsidy can hp contributo higher prices when they decide they need to retire the hurds to drive prices up, something they just settled a law suite over. FYI if you drink milk you may be entitled to part of the settlements!

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

Sure, some people don't like the way they look, but most of the politicians who get upset about wind farms seem to have interests in coal. Not a coincidence.

I think this thread is informative, but here is the real answer back in post #2. How many of Trump's advisors have direct links to the fossil fuel industry, again? Let's not be naive and assume trump is trying to do anything but throw shade at a rival of oil and coal.

 

[TGHusker]

The House passed a resolution, 228-194, that would repeal the "Stream Protection Rule," a measure issued recently that barred mining companies from putting any of their waste in local waterways.

And how does this help us?

It doesn't. I'm not sure why Republicans hate the environment so much. I would've thought they'd do everything in their power to protect God's creation.

This was a long time ago and just a random person but one of my mom's Christian friends told her we shouldn't worry about global warming because God will fix it if he wants and Christians are going to heaven anyway.

She is an ignorant - sorry for the strong words. I get upset when someone so badly misrepresents the faith. She should know that we are given the responsibility of being stewards of creation.

Regarding the wind turbines, I think they look like of cool driving on I-70 west of Salina, KS going towards Colorado. I've gotten a neat pic of them wt the old, original type of farm windmill in the foreground and one of those monsters in the background. Kind of a 'then and now' type of pic. They look cool at times but then again, they surround one farm's west side and I wonder what that would be like living there and not being able to enjoy one of those Kansas sunsets clear of obstacles.

 

[Whistlebritches]

Sure, some people don't like the way they look, but most of the politicians who get upset about wind farms seem to have interests in coal. Not a coincidence.

I think this thread is informative, but here is the real answer back in post #2. How many of Trump's advisors have direct links to the fossil fuel industry, again? Let's not be naive and assume trump is trying to do anything but throw shade at a rival of oil and coal.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Trump has a grudge against wind farms considering what happened in Scotland at his golf resort.

 

[DrunkOffPunch]

I have a close friend who used to work in wind energy. I saw this thread pop up and asked his opinions on wind energy as a whole and thought I'd share with you guys. Keep in mind I have basically no knowledge on the subject so I'll be paraphrasing his words. Also, this isn't to push any sort of political view and as he's been out of wind energy for ~3 or so years some of the info he gave me could be out of date. Here goes...

-Wind energy is very inefficient. Somewhere around 30%. Where it's at right now (or at least ~3 years ago) is more of a starting point than an indicator of its ability.

-By the time a turbine pays for itself the generator needs to be replaced which is the most expensive part of the turbine.

-They're working on pretty much eliminating the need for a generator to power the blades once they start. He said once this happens wind energy will be comparable to fossil fuels as far as effiency, all while cutting down on maintenance costs and of course being way cleaner than fossil fuels. They just need to figure out the technology.

-A regular work week was ~100 hours if they were on schedule and ~120 if they were behind. 18 hour workdays with with Sundays of if they were on schedule. One of the guys who worked there put in ~140 hours in week. That's nuts. Climbing a turbine on average took 30 minutes give or take.

I realize a lot of this isn't pertinent to the conversation at hand, but I just thought I'd share.

 

[Landlord]

-Wind energy is very inefficient. Somewhere around 30%. Where it's at right now (or at least ~3 years ago) is more of a starting point than an indicator of its ability.

Based off my understanding from the little research I've done this isn't true. I've always heard ~45-50%