251–260 of 413 posts
Or nuclear. There's that. Way less land occupation, no carpeting hillsides with solar panels, no ungainly windmills, no millions of pounds of toxic heavy metals to dispose of when batteries and panels go bad, and...oh....it works regardless of the weather.
Clearly nobody in the responses has stood next to an oil well or a wind turbine.
I worked in oil/gas for a long time. In addition to "windmills are killing all the birds", here are a few of the top green energy lies I've heard: 1. Solar panels are toxic, require more energy to produce than they generate, and can't be recycled. 2. EV's are worse for the environment than ICE vehicles. 3. Lithium mining is worse than oil/gas drilling. 4. Solar/wind prices are skyrocketing and everyone is abandoning…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Felis Catus doesn't have a native range in any meaningful manner, IMO. They are a global species like us, because of us. You can't put that cat back in the bag no matter the .22 cartridges you expend.
That shouldn't stop us from trying to limit their growth. "The cat is out of the bag" so to speak, but a lot of the growth comes from runaway cats, or cats that have been abandoned by their owners (happens more often than you think) We could start by requiring all domestic cats to be sterilized, so that they don't breed. Then the cat population would be limited to certified breeders and wild cats. We could also have…
I know that we've come a long way and pets have had humans around them for ages, but to me it still feels like we're doing them harm. I know that nature is even harder, but it's not like pets decided to live that way.
It's also hard to understand why people love one species, but also breed others on an industrial level, so they can eat them more easily.
Probably going to get a few downvotes for this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ridiculous argument. Why on earth would people care about the birds in the context of natural processes compared to unnatural processes? This is a monumentally stupid apples and oranges “gotcha”.
> natural processes I'm curious, what are you thinking of when you say 'natural processes'? I hope it's not cats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we cared about birds we'd be aggressively controlling the cat population.
Generally we care about a bird species as a whole rather than about individual birds of that species. If something is killing birds, even a lot of birds, but in a place where those birds are abundant and whatever is killing them will just lower lower their equilibrium population a bit rather than set it on a decline or lower it so far that they might die out in the area then there generally isn't a lot of concern ove…
I worked in oil/gas for a long time. In addition to "windmills are killing all the birds", here are a few of the top green energy lies I've heard: 1. Solar panels are toxic, require more energy to produce than they generate, and can't be recycled. 2. EV's are worse for the environment than ICE vehicles. 3. Lithium mining is worse than oil/gas drilling. 4. Solar/wind prices are skyrocketing and everyone is abandoning…
Do you have sources as to why they are lies? I'm not doubting you, but simply saying they're lies is just as disingenuous as the people making the statements in the first place
However, for your convenience, I used google to search for "are solar panels net energy positive" and found this as the 2nd link:
https://www.solarmelon.com/faqs/solar-panels-use-energy-manu...
This contains a link to at least one peer-reviewed paper:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es3038824
I can almost guarantee that a similar process will elicit similar answers for every other point in the GP's list.
I had an argument with a vegetarian cat owner about this the other week….
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clever of you to acknowledge but then glide over the wild exaggeration there. Still wrong, though: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1022937/history-nasa-bud... 1965 NASA budget in billions: $5.25 (the peak year) 1965 GDP: $743 billion giving us a NASA budget of 0.007 of GDP, or 0.7%
Apollo project is generally considered to have cost $25 billion, not $5 billion. Still, if we consider 0.007 of GDP in modern numbers, that's 2.65 trillion (2023) * 0.007 --> $18 billion. The fossil fuel industry receives $760 billion in subsidy. We're already spending more on energy; we're just spending it on the wrong energy.
5B is for 1965 alone, the peak year. As I said.
25B is the total over all years.
If we cared about birds we would be talking about reducing car traffic and saving more areas for wildlife. The argument against Solar and Wind with regards to wildlife preservation is almost always a distraction.
I think it's pretty clear if we cared much about anything we'd be doing a lot of things. But instead, we have this: We have a conversation like this one, I had it with my sister. We agree on this statement you've made in that conversation. Sister goes and buys a new gigantic SUV that gets 20 mpg. Understands we were just talking about how bad that is, but make a thousand excuses as to why she using the bad thing is a…