It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Memo Reveals Subversive Attack Strategy On Clean Energy

page: 3
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2012 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Have any of you ever seen a wind farm? I have. We drove past one in Kansas. It stretched for miles over an entire county.

Have any of you ever seen an oil refinery? I have. I drove past one in Grangemouth (scotland). It stretched for miles along the seafront.




posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
We already knew something like this was going on.

The trick is, proving that something must be done...then doing that something. Unfortunately, it's like putting the bell on the cat. Easy to say, hellish to actually complete.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by stanguilles7
 

Ethanol and biodiesel can replace fuel oil, hemp and a host of other plants can replace plastics made from oil. Would could be 90% off oil in 3-5 years if we had the will... The tech is there. But you right we do need to cut our consumption to some degree


No.

You want to pretend there is a magic green bullet that will allow you and our culture to continue to consume unabated. But ACTUAL environmentalists (not energy lobbyists) will tell you there is no solution to our levels of consumption.

Ethanol and biodiesel work fine on a small scale. On a large scale, they require a level of input that in no way can compete with oil. And can NEVER be produced at a rate that could compete with oil in terms of volume.

Yes, hemp and other plants can make plastics. But that process is not really very sustainable, either. It requires a highly intensive farming system that further degrades the environment, all so people can continue to have disposable plastic items.

You desperately WANT to believe ALL we have to do is switch over to 'green' tech. I get it. It's an easy pipe-dream; you get to pretend the only problem is 'big oil' and that we can continue to consume with no repercussions, if we just tweek the source. But it's untrue. Face reailty. Our levels of consumption are unsustainable.


You have no clue what you are talking about you ignored all my posts and links in your other thread and just keep repeating non-sense. WE could easily replace oil and plastics and it is far more sustainable then the current model. The only thing keeping us from doing so is government regulation protecting oil markets.

Hemp is one of the most sustainable and useful crops we can grow it improves soil is easy on water and practically grows itself. It used to be a mainstay in US agriculture until Dupont regulated it out of business.
www.hemphasis.net...

Hemp is only one source there are others:
www.thenakedscientists.com...

Tell Brazil that ethanol can't replace oil. 50% of their cars and trucks run on ethanol. For years they imported zero oil and they import very little today. Thy only use 1% of their farmland to produce ethanol for half their cars so don't tell me it is unsustainable . The US could easily produce enough ethanol to replace current oil fuels demands put a lot of people back to work and get us off oil. and that does not even include bio-diesel

The only reason Brazil imports is their politicians sold out to the oil cartels. Ethanol can even be run in diesels and jet engines with slight modifications. Corn is not the best producer of ethanol it is used because that is what farmers are used to. Sweet sorghum fodder beets and a host of other crops are far better producers easier to grow and better for the soil then corn. Do some research instead of repeating propaganda. alcoholcanbeagas.com... is a good place to start



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Kali74
 


The only thing people are doing is creating another "big oil" and some people are fine with that.

Rinse and repeat.


wind energy won't kill the gulf of mexico
wind energy won't leak oil into our seafood supply
wind energy won't have thousand-year human dead zones like chernobyl, and fukishima.
wind energy does not cause "death by breath" as do coal plants
wind energy doesn't cause drinking water that comes out of faucets to catch fire
wind energy doesn't require a military to secure
wind energy generation can be done by the "everyman", not just by the "wealthyman"



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Sigh. I get you are interested n facts.

Regardless, the 'study' you site does not connect climate change or global warming to wind farms. It just doesn't

Carry on with your ignorance.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Sigh. I get you are interested n facts.

Regardless, the 'study' you site does not connect climate change or global warming to wind farms. It just doesn't

Carry on with your ignorance.



Denying ignorance is a strong point for me.

If you cant understand the article,and the title of it,thats not my problem,thats yours.

Im not the one "claiming" right or wrong,was I ?

Denying Ignorance indeed.

You may have the last word............................



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Despite the claim at ATI that they dropped the proposals in the memo it's clear they most definitely have not.


"We do see evidence of co-ordination," said Peter Kelley a spokesman for the American Wind Energy Assocation. "The same rhetoric pops up all over the place. Things that are disproven, that are demonstrably untrue, continually get repeated."

Recent developments in the campaign against wind power include:

• A new $6m election ad buy by the ultra-conservative group Americans for Prosperity attacking Barack Obama's support for wind and solar power.

• An email and telephone campaign by the American Legislative Exchange Council and Americans for Tax Reform to repeal or alter clean energy mandates requiring electricity companies to get a share of their power from renewables.

• Putting forward Alec-drafted bills overturning those measures in Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Colorado, Montana and Washington state.

Droz, in the telephone interview, confirmed that he had enlisted support for telephone campaigns from Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks – both of which have received funds from the Koch family. He also appeared at an anti-wind forum sponsored by the John Locke Foundation in North Carolina last December.

But he dismissed any idea of a co-ordinated effort. "We happen to have common interests on some things," he said. "But it's not collusion."

But conservative activists describe the ramp-up as critical to the effort to defeat Obama in the elections. "It's absolutely a campaign issue and it's a big one," said Dave Schwartz, who heads the Maryland chapter of Americans for Prosperity, a tea party group with Koch funds. "It absolutely is a contentious issue," he said.

Kert Davies, Greenpeace research director, agrees. "They are going back to the states to create the space for an anti-Obama, anti-green energy thing. It is really a political attack," he said. " What the right wing wants to perpetuate is that this is a type of energy that never works and requires massive government handouts."


theguardian


edit on 16-5-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


You cited an article as evidence of something that it didnt actually prove "Windfarms cause global warming"

When pressed to prove the claim, you hid behind excuses.

Hence, you not only embraced ignorance, you lay down with it in a meadow and copulated.
edit on 16-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


The oil companies do not pay one cent of tax to the government. The people who purchase their product pay the taxes. Everything is passed on to the consumer, the oil companies hardly ever lose money. The traders or speculators seem to make more profits than the oil companies and many of the oil company execs invest in that. I never see those speculative investors loose money. They purchase the oil from the oil companies and inflate it and sell it back to the refineries. So who are you, an employee of some company who contracts with the oil industry and big businesses to disrupt negativity of these industries?



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join