131–140 of 413 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I introduce you to our lord and saviour nuclear energy.
The people who are concerned about wind turbines killing birds also tend to not want nuclear power plants.
It's the same conclusion as hydrogen car investment. It's easy to maintain ice technology, but the generation, storage, trabsport, use are riddled with issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I introduce you to our lord and saviour nuclear energy.
I'm genuinely curious, why are there so many extraordinarily pro-nuclear people on this forum? And how many of them have greater than zero experience with nuclear anything? I worked in the nuclear power industry for a decade and people in the industry are not as maniacally pro-nuclear as the people in this forum.
The enthusiasm is largely for newer nuclear designs that address the FUD that gets thrown around whenever nuclear is mentioned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally it does not. Makes a lot of people upset if things don’t work out, sure.
Agree. Usually it doesn't blow up but sometimes does. When it does, all of the squirrels in the area get 3 eyes and 5 legs.
Then there is Chernobyl which now has healthier and more diverse wildlife than much of the world because humans have evacuated.
The title is symptomatic for the climate discourse; either for or against oil/coal and wind/solar. I find the question "what is a reliable, clean and affordable energy source?" much more relevant and productive.
[flagged]
Yeah... Could you explain why any oil company would pay to install and maintain "daylight level" lighting equipment at every oil rig, then pay the electric bills to run it all night, 365 nights per year?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we cared about birds we'd be aggressively controlling the cat population.
deleted
[flagged]
Yeah... Could you explain why any oil company would pay to install and maintain "daylight level" lighting equipment at every oil rig, then pay the electric bills to run it all night, 365 nights per year?
It's not a crazy claim; here's a NASA article on fracking wells being very visible from space at night. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/87725/shale-revolut...
I am not a conspiracy theorist, it's just a simple case of "follow the money". The fossil fuel industry is a trillion dollar per year business and their interest is to keep it this way. So poisoning the well is a good strategy for them. If you thought about it, it was clear the bird argument was always just a talking point nimby types were fed with, so they have something alarming to repeat and to get outraged, witho…
> "follow the money". The fossil fuel industry is a trillion dollar per year business and their interest is to keep it this way. Meanwhile, the green energy industry is not-for-profit, volunteer, altruistic and unbiased. That's incredibly naive. If you don't think the global capitalists are moving towards a green transition, I'm not sure what to tell you.
[flagged]
My parents rented land on which there was a smaller oil rig. The rig was eventually removed and now the land is used for farming. OTOH I cannot image how they want to do this with the conrete foundations of wind turbines. The newer ones are up to 300 meters high. With that leverage the foundations must be absolutely massive. I don't think they can ever be revmoved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we cared about birds we'd be aggressively controlling the cat population.
deleted
A serious discussion of the safety of birds would sound very different, but that isn't the goal. The goal is to talk about anything other than reducing fossil fuel production.