Reply With Quote
You have given no reasons whatsoever to be against these projects.
You just started making up a bunch of . No surprise, this is the nature of this forum and current politics.
Some, but I was asking him if he supports it. Really I was asking him why he supports these particular types of solar projects. He couldn't come up with a good answer other than he supports solar in general, so he reverted to his chump routine.
No surprise, this is the nature of this forum and current politics. You are either for or against <insert broad complicated issue>, no room for nuance.
You have given no reasons whatsoever to be against these projects.
You just started making up a bunch of . No surprise, this is the nature of this forum and current politics.
Grand Canyon uranium mining set to go ahead despite ban from Obama
Uranium mining on the doorstep of the Grand Canyon national park is set to go ahead in 2015 despite a ban imposed last year by Barack Obama.
Energy Fuels Resources has been given federal approval to reopen itsold Canyon Mine, located six miles south of the canyon's popular South Rim entrance, that attracts nearly 5 million visitors a year.
The Canadian company says that the Obama administration's ban on new hard-rock mining over 1m acres doesn't apply because its rights date from when it closed over 20 years ago.
However, its approval is based on an environmental study the US Forest Service conducted more than 25 years ago, in 1986.
Several environment groups – including the Grand Canyon Trust, theSierra Club and the Centre for Biological Diversity – and the Havasupai tribe filed suit in March against the Forest Service, arguing that the study is badly outdated.
Curtis H Moore, a spokesman for Energy Resources, disagrees. "The Forest Service looked at that review with modern eyes and determined that it's adequate. And 1986 was not that long ago. These are tiny mines– about 20 acres."
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...uranium-mining
20 acres? no runoff?
ing canadians
what's your policy suggestion? must have something in mind, right?
I said they provide zero environmental benefits and zero benefits over oil and coal. I asked you what benefits they provided and you were unable to give any.
Stop pretending solar is ever going to replace fossil fuels and prevent global warming. Here's an appropriate use of a feel good supplemental energy source...
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ighlight=solar
Here are some more reasons...look for the posts by someone named Chumpdumper
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ighlight=solar
"Stop pretending solar is ever going to replace fossil fuels and prevent global warming"
replace, no. reduce heavy dependence upon? yes
even now, there are several conventional energy sources: hydro, nuclear, coal, gas.
solar, both centralized and distributed, and wind can and will make significant contributions, if not blocked by the corporations invested in those 4 conventional sources who give lip service to "free market" but do everything they can to block compe ion by buy politicians.
retrograde Repug assholes like LePage
Maine Gov. Paul LePage Vetoes Popular, Bipartisan Solar Energy Bill
On Friday evening, Maine Governor Paul LePage vetoed a bill to expand solar power in Maine that had passed the legislature with broad bipartisan support last month.
The bill aimed to restore a $2,000 solar energy rebate program that ended last year that helped Maine homes and businesses install solar and hot water projects. This was paid for by placing a one-hundredth of a cent per kilowatt-hour fee on consumers’ electric bills — amounting to what supporters say is about a five-cent per month increase. Uncontroversial enough to pass the House 109-30 and the Senate 22-12 despite much narrower Democratic majorities in both chambers, the bill’s veto leaves Maine as the only state in New England without a program in place to help residents install solar projects in homes and businesses.
According to the Bangor Daily News, Governor LePage cited energy bills and colder weather as reasons he opposed the bill, calling LD 1252 “bad energy policy” in his veto letter.
Maine may not have the solar capacity that a state like Arizona or New Mexico does, but it is at a lower la ude than Germany, a country which has been breaking records on total and per-capita solar power output. Maine receives a third more sunshine than Germany, yet there were times when that sunshine produced 30 percent of Germany’s total power demand. While the Germans have done this, they have made solar power just as cheap as conventional power.
LePage has opposed efforts to increase energy efficiency,
tried to roll back renewable energy targets,
moved to get out of anti-smog regulations,
vetoed a bill creating a climate adaptation working group, and
touted the benefits climate change will have on Maine after agreeing with a radio talk show host who called climate science a “hoax” and “lying science.”
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...r-veto-lepage/
aka, checkbox Repug asshole
When you link truthout, naked capitalism, and alternet, you are basically saying that survivalist right wing nut jobs like in the OP are legitimate sources as well.
This is what I have gotten at bouties about before. Does he actually want to appeal to people's reason or does he just want to masturbate?
Bouties whacks off a lot.
Prove it.
You said some birds were killed then made up a bunch of .
Prove all your contentions.
You are not green? Wow, what surprise...
And your concern for the birds via your le for this thread is heartfelt and touching.
Can you cry on command as well, or do you have to get into character ?
Work with me here, you're a bird... with a bird concussion that's just been vaporized by giant mirrors...And the park is gone.
le of the thread is the le of the article. Common forum practice. How many times am I going to have to point this out to you lol
Time for artificial selection to get to work.
Ok so you posted it for a reason.
You have a profound love for the birds just like the author.
The intent of the article and you posting it are touching, ok now...
1. Complains about not being able to have a serious conversation
2. Trolls in his own threads.
"100's of million of dollars of taxpayer money"
loan guarantees aren't gifts. Has the CSP project defaulted on its govt guaranteed loans?
"permanently destroy 1000's of acres of protected park land"
lost water? lost camping sites? lost recreations how many Americans have visited this lifeless desert area per year?
"provide zero environmental benefit"
hmm, no miners dead from black lung or killed by BigCoal's unsafe mines.
No air/water/human pollution from fracking.
No nuclear waste to dispose of.
No $10Bs of TAXPAYER-liable insurance for nuclear plants
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions