|toolbar powered by Conduit|
Forum is moving to new host!
China one of the worlds greatest polluters of the atmosphere along with the USA has over the last few months contracted with two US companies to build a massive solar system to generate electricity.
Meanwhile we in the US still give mostly lip service to such programs. Partisan politics being the stumbling block.
Since most Democrats want such a system along with the use of natural gas, the Republican, instead of joining forces for the betterment of all of us, have become obstructionists.
The irony is that both parties could enjoy wonderful reviews if they could work together to make us more independent of foreign oil. But the Republicans would rather we continue to send dollars overseas, weakening our currency and keeping us vulnerable to the whims of others.
joel its really not about politics and each party blaming eachother isnt helping .here in florida a republic congressman worked with flp to build a rather large solar power station which is now underconstruction as we speak it was done using incentives such as tax cuts flp was more than willing to do this as the tax cuts will pay for most of the building cost.our demo congressmen were dead agint the tax cut.flp will soon be faced with dealing with the carbon credit proposed by the demos cap and trade they generate almost all thier power with oil and our power bill here in florida will go up considerablly mine is already aroung 200 a month.for goverment to actully help they need us to allow building of nuke plants give massive tax cuts to power companies building solar wind and wave and geo thermal power stations just forcing them to do so with cap and trade taxes will depleate thier capitol to invest and slow down the process.regulations on building these stations also need to be relaxed as liberal enviromentlist cant have it both ways. it takes years in some cases due to studies and permits to build anything while all the time our power needs grow this has been a major problem in solving the issue.obama just did away with the major containment site for waste from nuke power plants increasing the cost to despose of the waste and making it almost impossible for power companies to build new nuke plants as they have no where to dispose of the waste.so as you see joel this is a double edged knife both parties are playing games while we loose out.recently im sure you are aware that a mijor oil find was discovered by chevro a sea of oil with billions of barrels of oil already producing 125,000 barrels a day .its not taking the 10 years demos claim to get to market its getting to market now.but there is a issue new permits to build oil refiners in the usa have not been issued for years we cant even refine all the oil we use because left wing liberals dont want them built because of polution.again that knife has a sharp edge with both sides hands bloody from grabing to convience people to vote for them without telling the whole truth.the truth of the matter is there are way to many people in the world and here in the usa we cant control that without taking drastic measures that would cause the public to scream bloody murder.net to actually produce a large % of green power will take a massive effort by private industry and incentives for them to do so not taxing them the usa goverment cant do it the large coporations can.our goverment needs to lighten up on enviromental regulations in the short term to allow construction of the sites we need make tax cuts to companies that build certain sites ,help fund research and stop playing politics .its plain to see republicans and demo are both at fault inthis issue but are to busy fighting like little kids over a sucker to actually fix the issue .it wont happen over night it will indeed take 2 or 3 decades new homes need to have different codes ,old homeowners need serious long term tax bvreaks to make the investment to upgrage thier homes to reduce energy costs and the companies that develop this need to sell it for reasonable prices its a very complex issue.
the envio. nuts in calif. are holding up the biggest solar plant in the u.s.no matter what you try to do somebody somewhere is going to complain.
On Sunday, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is actively opposing a measure to build 13 solar and wind power projects in the Mojave Desert. Of the proposed 1 million acres of desert land, about a quarter of it was donated to the federal government by a private source for land conservation, a fact that Feinstein apparently is using as justification for her decision.
Her opposition to the plan is a major setback for the â€œgreenâ€ movement, yet many California environmental groups are thrilled with this decision. Waitâ€¦ what? Thatâ€™s right â€” the extreme left is opposed to solar energy in the middle of the desert. But why?
Probably because, like all alternative energy proposals, there are negative consequences. The scenic and diverse landscape of the Mojave Desert, for example, is far too precious as a natural treasure to be developed, even if the development is a step toward clean energy, or if the development isnâ€™t all that intrusive, anyway. Like solar panels, for instance.
This wouldnâ€™t be the first time clean energy proposals were opposed for seemingly petty reasons; wind energy was met with strong opposition by the environmental groups, as windmills may interrupt the migratory pattern of certain birds; birds that apparently fail to see a giant, monolithic structure in front of them. You know, the kind we want to survive and reproduce.
Before his death, Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) strongly opposed measures to put a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, primarily because it would interrupt the scenic view from the adjacent Kennedy compound.
It seems that the Democrats like to talk the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk, their environmental record isnâ€™t much to brag about. Especially considering that Democrats largely oppose common-sense strategies for alternative energy like nuclear power.
Let me clarify â€” Democrats, including power players like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are largely opposed to nuclear waste, yet remain supportive of expanding our countryâ€™s reliance on nuclear power. Itâ€™s this sort of doublespeak that allows them to maintain support of their base â€” the kind that oppose nuclear energy because of â€œThree Mile Island, man!â€ â€” and still appear to be rational. Being opposed to all propositions for nuclear waste storage basically rules out any expansion of nuclear power market share; currently, nuclear waste is stored on-site. How long on-site storage is viable, no one can say for sure.
Leftists argue that nuclear power isnâ€™t a good solution because of the risk of radiation and the environmental devastation that would almost certainly ensue if a meltdown occurred. You know, because it happened once in the 1970s at Three Mile Island (even though it wasnâ€™t really that bad. There were no deaths, no injuries, and the facility is still in use today). Oh, and in the Soviet Union at Chernobyl. Because as we all are well aware, safety and construction standards in the USSR were always 100% sound.
So, no nuclear power, because something could go wrong. And no solar energy, either, because solar panels are ugly and would ruin our view of the desert. Oh, and wind power is a definite â€œno,â€ because birds might be dumb enough to fly into them. Forget Darwinism, think of our poor feathered friends! And if you want to talk about things like ethanol or biofuel, you can forget it!
It seems that liberals donâ€™t know what they want. They demand things like â€œgreen jobs, now!â€ but stamp their feet at any proposed solutions. They scare us to death with doom-and-gloom scenarios about global warming, straight out of Roland Emmerichâ€™s The Day After Tomorrow or 2012, then refuse to acknowledge that there is no end-all solution, and that there will always be consequences of some sort. Then the Hollywood elite jet-set around the globe to attend conferences in Copenhagen, but when it comes to actually making sacrifices, theyâ€™re not so welcome to change.
And even if we caved and placated them by passing cap & trade, and signed on to the Kyoto Protocol, and somehow forced every other country to follow the Kyoto guidelines to the letter, it would still be irrelevant â€” because all these measures would not do anything to stop global warming. Thatâ€™s right â€” all these measures are useless. But I guess when it comes to the political left, feeling like theyâ€™re making a difference is much more important than actually making one.
I smell horse ****. Never mind it's just another donkey story, I mean independant story.
It used to be that the US of A led the world in technology, manufacturing, engineering and science. We could always be counted on to show the world how all of these disciplines could lead to a better standard of living.
But over the past 20-30 years while the private sector has continued to lead the world in innovation all of our politicians have degenerated into a food fight for personal recognition.
This is why the following saying is even more important today:
POLITICIANS SHOULD BE CHANGED AS FREQUENTLY AS DIAPERS AND FOR THE SAME REASON. THEY BOTH ARE FULL OF SH-T.