Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 74

Thread: Obama Rejects Keystone XL Pipeline!

  1. #21
    Senior Member Williamsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Penns Woods
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post
    Germany is generating 75% of its energy from renewable sources. I think their weather and latitude are similar to Seattle's.
    Highly subsidize and guaranteed by government surcharges to the consumer. It is an offense to the environment also with the endless eruption of gaudy windmills that kill native and transient species of birds, some endangered and power line infrastructure that gobble up beautiful scenic country sides. I think it is a foolish gamble and the fear of nuclear power catastrophe is driving it. I don't see it working out well but I'm glad Germany wants to be the guinea pig except it is risking further injury to the Eau economy by this foolishness.

  2. #22
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,951
    There is some concern that the Canadian product will still be brought to market, but with the pipeline killed the route will be via seaports in the Pacific NW. There's already a huge effort underway here to build large coal loading/shipment facilities, which will send a large amount of new shipping traffic carrying toxic cargos through a tremendously environmentally sensitive area. My whole county, which is in the route used, is a National Monument...

    So by cancelling the Keystone XL, we may have just upped our odds of having a super-terrific environmental disaster here in the Salish Sea.

    Cheers.

    http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepol...eaded-our-way/

  3. #23
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Williamsmith View Post
    Highly subsidize and guaranteed by government surcharges to the consumer. It is an offense to the environment also with the endless eruption of gaudy windmills that kill native and transient species of birds, some endangered and power line infrastructure that gobble up beautiful scenic country sides. I think it is a foolish gamble and the fear of nuclear power catastrophe is driving it. I don't see it working out well but I'm glad Germany wants to be the guinea pig except it is risking further injury to the Eau economy by this foolishness.
    Germany uses about half of the energy per capita than the US, which is a help. It would be interesting to see a run down of the total economic picture, including market externalities related to the environment and human health. They produce a significant portion of the solar panels and wind turbines for the whole world and have a supportive infrastructure that provides significant employment. And it's not like the US doesn't subsidize the oil industry. An economic risk, for sure. If a person believes that climate change is caused or related to man's activity and a major threat to the world's populations and environment, like the majority of climate scientists, technology hasn't given many options to fossil fuels that are not without their own less catastrophic problems.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,673
    Or else it's a super terrific environmental disaster in the Midwest where the Keystone XL was planned to be built over aquifers and so on. Native American tribes have protested where it flows over their land. There is no win. The win is not to mine the tarsands and to leave the oil in the ground.

    https://emiliocogliani.wordpress.com...line-decision/
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,673
    Germany uses about half of the energy per capita than the US, which is a help.
    I would suspect that's mostly transportation rather than home energy use. Either way yes, sure, but I think the problem is we commute (and fly) too much, not that our refrigerators are super inefficient or something really.

    And it's not like the US doesn't subsidize the oil industry.
    the whole world subsidizes fossil fuels, massively, so that it's not just an issue for people who hate subsidies, but a major issue for environmentalists - to at least stop the subsidizing.
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

  6. #26
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,799
    Wind turbines, properly located, apparently pose less risk to birds than do other forms of energy production:

    http://www.carbonbrief.org/bird-deat...t-the-evidence

    "Several studies have compared the effect of different energy sources on bird mortality overall. One, published earlier this year, calculates windfarms killed 20,000 birds died in 2009 in the US – while nuclear plants killed about 330,000 and fossil fueled power plants more than 14 million. The research concludes that taken together, fossil-fueled facilities are about 17 times more dangerous per gigawatt hour of electricity produced to birds than wind and nuclear power stations."

    Also, newer, shrouded turbines are designed to be even less dangerous to birds than those most commonly used today.

    It remains to be seen if alternative fuels are a boon or a burden, but if any country can make it work, it's Germany.

  7. #27
    Senior Member peggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,857
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post
    Wind turbines, properly located, apparently pose less risk to birds than do other forms of energy production:

    http://www.carbonbrief.org/bird-deat...t-the-evidence

    "Several studies have compared the effect of different energy sources on bird mortality overall. One, published earlier this year, calculates windfarms killed 20,000 birds died in 2009 in the US – while nuclear plants killed about 330,000 and fossil fueled power plants more than 14 million. The research concludes that taken together, fossil-fueled facilities are about 17 times more dangerous per gigawatt hour of electricity produced to birds than wind and nuclear power stations."

    Also, newer, shrouded turbines are designed to be even less dangerous to birds than those most commonly used today.

    It remains to be seen if alternative fuels are a boon or a burden, but if any country can make it work, it's Germany.
    Yeah, having lived in Germany for several years, I have to say we didn't see a lot of bird carcasses around the wind mills.
    But we did see a lot of cloudy days. Funny how Germany can produce so much solar energy with all it's cloudy weather when we can't produce what we need with our abundance of sunny days (so say some).
    Ask yourself, which would you rather deal with: an oil spill, fracking chemical spill, or a solar spill.
    A 'solar spill' is simply a sunny day.

    *solar energy will become 'a thing' when the big energy companies figure out how to charge for the sun.

  8. #28
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,951

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    476
    Germany is steeply increasing investment in geothermal energy. There are other sources than wind and solar. However, thereís no escaping the need for more efficient usage. As others have already said, retrofit buildings and design new ones for passive efficiency. Rethink lifestyle factors. And letís address the automobile problem! I know 4-people families who run 5 cars- one for each person plus a family vehicle. Note, every car is an SUV, each capable of holding all 4 people plus shopping of luggage! Their argument is that they donít all follow the same schedule. I stilll donít see the need for the 5th vehicle.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Williamsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Penns Woods
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanne View Post
    Germany is steeply increasing investment in geothermal energy. There are other sources than wind and solar. However, there’s no escaping the need for more efficient usage. As others have already said, retrofit buildings and design new ones for passive efficiency. Rethink lifestyle factors. And let’s address the automobile problem! I know 4-people families who run 5 cars- one for each person plus a family vehicle. Note, every car is an SUV, each capable of holding all 4 people plus shopping of luggage! Their argument is that they don’t all follow the same schedule. I stilll don’t see the need for the 5th vehicle.
    Ill tell you what.....you get Texas on board with this and I’ll consider rethinking lifestyle factors. You get China and India on board.....and I might even try it a Little myself.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •