Don't Put the Hybrids in Reverse
Apparently Congress could vote to double the amount of greenhouse gases we produce by awarding subsidies and tax breaks for coal companies.
Sign here to say no to such a backward thinking idea.
posted by kate @ 10:53 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
So far as I can tell, increasing coal power plant production is what we are choosing in this country.
No one will allow us to build new nuclear reactors. Even though the newest technology is fail-safe so long as gravity continues to work as expected. And even though your average coal power plant releases more toxic radiation into the local environment than your average nuclear plant. And also even though nuclear waste products are a centralized problem rather than a dispersed problem like the emissions from a coal plant.
And obviously petrol fired power plants are not attractive at this point.
Solar is making strides, but no one who is thinking about it realistic terms thinks it can even make a dent in our energy needs for some time to come.
Wind has it's own problems. Even "green" types can't agree. (See problems with birds if you're not sure what I'm talking about.)
But if we'd all just stop wasting so much energy we might not need any increased generation capacity.
Turn off lights when you're not in the room. Run you refrigerator a couple degrees warmer (but still at a safe temp for your food). Bump your A/C thermostat up a degree, or two.
But we all know how to reduce our energy consumption. It's just a matter of actually putting that knowledge to work.
I agree with Senator Sanders: We have to do much, much better.
The bill should require that the fuel be produced without increasing greenhouse gas emissions - period. And we should work on better ways to get around and, of course, learn to save energy in a more efficient manner.
I'll tell you though, I feel rather silly reducing my family's energy consumption when government leaders from all over the world wasted a TON of energy to attend the G8 summit. Really silly. But that's another post altogether.
I'll go a step further. I don't believe that global warming is being caused by mankind. My own study has caused me to conclude it's just the normal heating and cooling cycles the earth has done since it came into being.
So, if someone is worried about it, then double up for me, cause I'm not changing.
Your own study? That's hysterical.
And what are your credentials that you think YOUR study trumps all the others?
God complex, anyone?
Yes, my own study. I've studied what people have said on both sides of the issue and have concluded that it's nothing more than the normal heating and cooling cycle of the earth.
Start reading what I wrote. I didn't say I 'conducted' my own study, like I got cardboard and chickenwire out and set up a study in my backyard. I said "My own study has caused me to conclude..." That's the same as saying "I've studied the matter from both sides and my conclusion is...."
Geez, start talking nice to me. I'm not your enemy.
My bad.
Please don't start throwing gasoline powered tennis balls at my house. I write with a wink and poke.
I know. I said poke.
rw-
You yourself admonished the blogmistress a while back and stated the medium lacks the normal clues of conversation. That would lead one to believe that your choice of words was intentional and designed to create just the sort of misinterpretation that Kate had. If your original intent was the same as saying "I've studied the matter from both sides and my conclusion is...." you should have said something to that effect instead of using study, which in a context that certainly implied you were conducting experiments of your own and not just reading the Internet.
Post a Comment
<< Home