They had problems with wind farms and agriculture, especially cattle and sheep, in Britain. Quite a few court cases about it over there. I know we have a whole lot more area to put things but it is still something that needs to be considered.
Mark wrote: > Agriculture works just fine under the wind mills and the birds do have > eyes. > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:52 AM, dick thompson > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > But they will and you know they will. We will find the equivalent > of spiking trees by groups like ELF sabotaging the windmills and > solar panels because of the migratory birds. And I would assume > West Texas is also good for other things as well. Don't they > have agriculture there now? Where are you going to put that? > > RichardForbes wrote: >> West Texas would be an option, if the ecologists don't ruin it by >> worrying about migratory birds. >> >> On Jun 28, 10:46 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Where are you going to put all of them. When you look at what they >>> produce from acres of solar panels and windmills, which are dependent on >>> the wind blowing at a certain minimum speed even to work at all and then >>> the noise they make disturbs the fauna of the area, what would be enough >>> of them. Add to that all the NIMBY of those who live where the >>> windmills would work andyou have a problem, especially when the NIMBY >>> folks are congressmen and senators (Kerry, Kennedy, Frank, Markey ring a >>> bell?). Then there is the storage and transportation problem of the >>> product which is not working well yet either. I can see doing research >>> on these methods but I cannot see stopping the production of what we >>> know works and the outlawing of other means of production which we know >>> can produce what is required while the research is going on. That is >>> what has been going on with out congressmen and senators and the >>> no-drilling legislation. We hear that it will take 10 years to bring >>> the wells on line - and we have been hearing this for years now. If >>> they had drilled when the subject first came up, the wells would be >>> online now and we would not be dependent on foreign oil now but I guess >>> our betters missed that point. >>> >>> >>> >>> Mark wrote: >>> >>>> Gee dick.... there are not enough of them... >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:26 AM, dick thompson >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> And they are not capable of meeting even a small percentage of the >>>> US use of electricity. Nor will they be able to in the near >>>> future. >>>> >>>> I was talking about the carbon credits. The credits are used to >>>> plant trees, not windmills. Guess you missed that point. >>>> >>>> Mark wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dick, >>>>> >>>>> Just what are you talking about..... Alternative energy sources >>>>> exist NOW. just go to Palm Springs and look at the hill sides... >>>>> anybody can count the numbers of wind turbines.. no science >>>>> involved. A geo-thermal plant is easily identified as is a >>>>> nuclear plant and a hydoelectric dam, hearing people KNOW the >>>>> difference between an electric car and a gas/diesel motor (the >>>>> deaf look for the tail pipe or lack thereof) There is NO mystery >>>>> in accountability. You simply use oil profits to put itself out >>>>> of business. >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:36 AM, dick thompson >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> How would you do that and how would you enforce it. >>>>> >>>>> Reminds me of the carbon trade/carbon credits scam. You pay >>>>> x amount of dollars to plant trees somewhere and that gives >>>>> you the right to trash the regulatory laws about energy use. >>>>> At what point do you prove that those dollars actually >>>>> planted trees that are going to be taken care of and replace >>>>> the carbon you used up. That part of the equation is >>>>> missing. Do you think that those peons who plant the trees >>>>> are going to insure that they grow and prosper? If you don't >>>>> enforce the one side of the equation, then you do not have an >>>>> equation at all, you have a scam, and that is what it is. >>>>> Same principle with your suggestion. I can throw x amount of >>>>> dollars at alternate energy source research but unless it is >>>>> actually tracked to make sure it is used as it is supposed to >>>>> be then it is garbage. Look at the AGW conference that was >>>>> held earlier this year. They held it in Bali and the >>>>> attendees all flew in on their private jets for a week of >>>>> swanning around a fancy resort and making soundbites about >>>>> all the good they were doing. Then they got back in their >>>>> private jets and flew elsewhere to tell us we need to >>>>> conserve energy and use one sheet of toilet paper and pay >>>>> twice as much in gas tax and pay more for heating and cooling >>>>> because it is for the good of the environment and for the >>>>> cheeellllddddrrrreeeennnn. Thank you Algore. >>>>> >>>>> THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Keith, who owns and therefore profits from oil exploration >>>>>> and >>>>>> subsequent drilling has EVERYTHING to do with whether or not >>>>>> it is >>>>>> actually done or even allowed. If the Gringo-American people >>>>>> actually >>>>>> had a vested interest in oil and its profits (not just the >>>>>> taxes from >>>>>> its use) you could bet that derricks would be springing up >>>>>> all over >>>>>> the place as well as refineries and piping systems. Why >>>>>> should they >>>>>> take the chance on despoiling the natural beauty of an area >>>>>> just to >>>>>> have a multinational take the money and run ?? Unfettered >>>>>> drilling >>>>>> and profit taking by oil that stayed at home would be a >>>>>> great boon and >>>>>> even the looneys know that and would, I'm sure, be in favor >>>>>> especially >>>>>> if a portion of that profit would be used solely for >>>>>> developing >>>>>> alternative energy and eventually CLOSING the wells and >>>>>> refineries. >>>>>> The Chinese get it.... but they despoil OTHER countries and >>>>>> areas to >>>>>> accomplish the goal of garnering profit for their Government. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 27, 6:02 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Holly, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't know what your comment has to do with our Nation >>>>>>> having a >>>>>>> comprehensive energy plan. The Chinese at the behest of >>>>>>> Cuba is getting >>>>>>> ready to start drilling just a few miles off of our >>>>>>> coastline for oil. We >>>>>>> are not, because of the current Administration, who has >>>>>>> refused to allow for >>>>>>> more oil exploration, and instead is "capping and trading" >>>>>>> energy, under >>>>>>> some policy based on fraudulent, non-existent scientific >>>>>>> data that claims we >>>>>>> are "Globally Warming". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Again, I haven't seen you up in arms about our current lack >>>>>>> of a >>>>>>> comprehensive energy plan. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Hollywood >>>>>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> KIT, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Chinese and Cubans are communists, they own the oil >>>>>>>> industry in >>>>>>>> their respective countries. They might well pay a private >>>>>>>> Corp. to >>>>>>>> explore for and even bring up the product (oil) but the >>>>>>>> Govt.'s of >>>>>>>> China & Cuba OWN it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 5:33 pm, Keith In Tampa >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why would we want the government involved in regulating >>>>>>>>> this? Why would >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> want the government involved in "capping or trading" >>>>>>>>> energy? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why is our government not encouraging a Comprehensive >>>>>>>>> Energy Policy, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> promotes alternative energies while also attempting to >>>>>>>>> allow for private >>>>>>>>> entities to explore for more oil reserves, as are the >>>>>>>>> Chinese and Cubans >>>>>>>>> right off of our coast? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:15 PM, ConservativeJack < >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > [email protected] >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't see anything surprising here. Alternative Energy >>>>>>>>>> providers say >>>>>>>>>> this is a good thing and that it will all be peachy in >>>>>>>>>> the end. >>>>>>>>>> The companies that stand to lose billions or even >>>>>>>>>> eventually be put >>>>>>>>>> out of business, claim it's doom and gloom. >>>>>>>>>> What else would anyone expect to be said by the opposing >>>>>>>>>> sides? >>>>>>>>>> So the choice is I can believe one or the other, based >>>>>>>>>> on what I WANT >>>>>>>>>> to believe, or I can believe that both are stating >>>>>>>>>> things in terms >>>>>>>>>> that suit their own interests and that things will >>>>>>>>>> probably end up (as >>>>>>>>>> always) neither as bad or good as predicted. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 10:35 am, dick thompson >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [Get Copyright Permissions] >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> >>>>>>>>>>> E-Mail >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g1/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | Print >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g2/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | Save >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/s13/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | Post >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g3/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | Get >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Photos >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g5/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | Get >>>>>>>>>>> Reprints >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/s17/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> | >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Reuse Options >>>>>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jun 27, 11:12 AM EDT >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Winners and losers emerge in climate bill >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> By CHRIS KAHN >>>>>>>>>>> AP Energy Writer >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> NEW YORK (AP) -- In addition to raising energy prices, >>>>>>>>>>> the climate >>>>>>>>>>> legislation that's winding through Congress would >>>>>>>>>>> create a parallel >>>>>>>>>>> >>> ... >>> >>> read more ยป- Hide quoted text - >>> >>> - Show quoted text - >>> >> > > > -- > Mark M. Kahle, , > www.filacoffee.com <http://www.filacoffee.com> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
