It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
"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."