EPA 'Cow Tax' Could Charge $175 per Dairy Cow to Curb Greenhouse Gases

[Old Rocks]

Have you seen how much space is needed for that 20%? It's a lot. Oregon still buys it's energy (more like steals at the rate we give it) from other states, ours included and we don't produce THAT much energy ourselves. Oregon is full of a bunch of greedy controlling bastards and they wonder why us raised in Western Washington can't stand em.

Kitten, you are full of shit. Hundreds of mills stand in working wheat fields, only taking up a few square yards each. And providing the farmer with a stable source of income to balance the vagaries of the market price of grains. And many of the other mills are sited on rock ridges that are good for nothing else.

Now those hydroelectric dams that provide most of the electricity for Oregon are across the Colombia with one end in Oregon and one in Washington. Seems strange that you claim that it is produced in Washington. Not only that, but Oregon produces an excess of energy compared to it's needs, as does Washington. Which we both ship to California.

As far as your so called regional rivalry, that exists only in your mind. I have lived in both states all of my life. No real differance between the people at all. More differance between the West siders and East siders of each state than the people of the two states.

 

[Old Rocks]

Excellent!!!!!! Then you guys can distribute it to the other states who don't want to spend money on it....
Re-Distribution of wealth baby!!!!

We plan to do that. For a price, of course

 

[KittenKoder]

Do some research, retard, and tell us what the wind potential is for the US and what it is for Denmark. Tell us what the electical consumption is for the US and what it is for Denmark. Geez, Sarge, is playing stupid a natural talent or do you work at it?

Actually, this is one of the topics RGS has a clearer understanding than most. Wind power is still in it's infancy, and even after a few more decades from now it will never produce the amount of electricity we would need to give up all other forms of power. Even if you tack on hydroelectric (which oddly causes just as much environmental damage as coal, just in a different environ) it would never offer enough for the US, let alone anywhere else. Coal is bad for the environment but also bad for humans (the dangers of mining), however we have another source that people still ignore ready to go, that's safer than coal, less damaging than coal, and takes up less space. It's a dream to go to wind power, but still only a dream. Look into the stats more, and also look at what electricity is being bought not just the produced amount. You will see that everywhere wind power is being utilized they are buying more than they produce from other places.

The biggest flaw is that wind power uses up land, land which has to be cleared of all plant life (especially trees) which causes damage to the environment anyway, or we have to sacrifice farm land which we need for food (too much of our food is already imported as it is). It's just not possible now, and may not be for at least another century.

 

[KittenKoder]

Kitten, you are full of shit. Hundreds of mills stand in working wheat fields, only taking up a few square yards each. And providing the farmer with a stable source of income to balance the vagaries of the market price of grains. And many of the other mills are sited on rock ridges that are good for nothing else.

Now those hydroelectric dams that provide most of the electricity for Oregon are across the Colombia with one end in Oregon and one in Washington. Seems strange that you claim that it is produced in Washington. Not only that, but Oregon produces an excess of energy compared to it's needs, as does Washington. Which we both ship to California.

As far as your so called regional rivalry, that exists only in your mind. I have lived in both states all of my life. No real differance between the people at all. More differance between the West siders and East siders of each state than the people of the two states.

Washington pays for it in environmental impact as well as money.

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually, this is one of the topics RGS has a clearer understanding than most. Wind power is still in it's infancy, and even after a few more decades from now it will never produce the amount of electricity we would need to give up all other forms of power. Even if you tack on hydroelectric (which oddly causes just as much environmental damage as coal, just in a different environ) it would never offer enough for the US, let alone anywhere else. Coal is bad for the environment but also bad for humans (the dangers of mining), however we have another source that people still ignore ready to go, that's safer than coal, less damaging than coal, and takes up less space. It's a dream to go to wind power, but still only a dream. Look into the stats more, and also look at what electricity is being bought not just the produced amount. You will see that everywhere wind power is being utilized they are buying more than they produce from other places.

The biggest flaw is that wind power uses up land, land which has to be cleared of all plant life (especially trees) which causes damage to the environment anyway, or we have to sacrifice farm land which we need for food (too much of our food is already imported as it is). It's just not possible now, and may not be for at least another century.

More bullshit. I have yet to see a place where a single tree has been cut down for a windmill. Once again, drive on I-84 past The Dalles, and see wheat fields with windmills in them, the wheat growing right up to the concrete bases of the mills. Most other siting is on the tops of rocky ridges, good for nothing else. In fact, a heavily forested area usually does not have enough wind to be worth putting mills there. Had it enough wind, it would not be forested. Montana, by itself, has a million Mgw potential for wind, and the cows would not mind the mills at all.

 

[Old Rocks]

Washington pays for it in environmental impact as well as money.

You mean that your end of the dams has more environmental impact than our end of the dam?

 

[Old Rocks]

It's time to harness wind energy potential
Posted by George Rede, The Oregonian June 05, 2008 11:14AM
Categories: Community Writers, Gordon Merseth

In what some would call a major acknowledgement, President Bush has stated that wind energy could provide 20 percent of the nation's electric power. He is not only correct; he has understated the ability of this resource to provide energy. With home heating oil now priced at $3-plus per gallon (and who knows how much this winter) and regular gasoline hitting the $4 per gallon mark, our attention to seriously consider alternate energy sources is visibly heightened.

Theoretically, there is more than enough wind energy resource in this country to satisfy all of the nation's electric power. Practically, there is enough to make us energy-independent. Wind energy now provides about 1 percent of the nation's power; and while this is a drop in the energy bucket, it is also twice the "windtricity" we produced just a year ago. Texas leads the way with 4,356 megawatts of installed wind generation and Oregon is 7th among all states, currently producing 886 megawatts of power. Interestingly, Oregon doesn't even rank in the top 20 states in terms of wind energy potential. That honor goes to North Dakota which, if fully developed, could supply about a third of the total national energy needs all by itself. It's time to harness wind energy potential - Opinion - The Oregonian - OregonLive.com

 

[KittenKoder]

You mean that your end of the dams has more environmental impact than our end of the dam?

No, but we are still paying for it as well. The impact itself should be a concern though for all. Which is the biggest problem with hydroelectric and why they are not as widely used as they could be. Some idiot (moved from another state further East not sure which) tried to put a dam on one of our salmon runs, luckily it got shot down. We have a nuclear plant and another on the way, they are tearing down an old one and going to try to rebuild a newer one because of a minor mishap a looong time ago. We supply a lot of power to outlying areas or neighboring states, we also transport power from Canada to other states as well. We need some kind of revenue besides our slacking imports/exports since our lumber industry is basically shot from all the excessive cutting in the recent past.

 

[Old Rocks]

No, but we are still paying for it as well. The impact itself should be a concern though for all. Which is the biggest problem with hydroelectric and why they are not as widely used as they could be. Some idiot (moved from another state further East not sure which) tried to put a dam on one of our salmon runs, luckily it got shot down. We have a nuclear plant and another on the way, they are tearing down an old one and going to try to rebuild a newer one because of a minor mishap a looong time ago. We supply a lot of power to outlying areas or neighboring states, we also transport power from Canada to other states as well. We need some kind of revenue besides our slacking imports/exports since our lumber industry is basically shot from all the excessive cutting in the recent past.

We all need some new industries. As you pointed out, both Oregon and Washington now have a very diminished lumber industry due to overcutting. We have a couple of new photovoltaic plants in Oregon, and have one on hold due to lack of credit. Intel is backing that one, called SpectraWatt, and they have the money for the primary construction, but need money for the start up phase. In any other economy, it would be there, but not now.

In nuke plants, there are no minor mishaps. Things like Three Mile Island taught us that. I am not against nuclear, it is simply far too expensive to be the primary supplier of energy. In fact, we need to get cracking on working on developing the fourth generation reactors. That would solve the waste issue, and even give us a use for the present waste. Geothermal, for the Western States, has huge potential, as does the possibility of getting energy from slow moving ocean currents.

The dams on the Snake were designed without any consideration of the salmon runs, as was the Grand Coulee. In fact, when they built the Grand Coulee, they considered the worth of the Colombia Salmon Run as zero. In spite of the fact that before the dams, they were harvesting two million salmon a year, without impacting the run at all. The runs we see today are sad reminders of our past stupidity.

 

[michiganFats]

How long is it going to be before Obama instructs the EPA to start trailing fat people with agents holding big plastic bags in order to suppress the environmental impact? I'm only half joking about this. Politicians aren't exactly the most rational people on Earth. Perhaps we'll have to install EPA approved "methane meters" in our homes(built in china,of course).

 

[Zoom-boing]

How long is it going to be before Obama instructs the EPA to start trailing fat people with agents holding big plastic bags in order to suppress the environmental impact? I'm only half joking about this. Politicians aren't exactly the most rational people on Earth. Perhaps we'll have to install EPA approved "methane meters" in our homes(built in china,of course).

'Methane meters'

No, politicians aren't exactly the most rational people on earth. But do they fart?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlkxQMxJmEU&feature=related]YouTube - Hillary Clinton Farts![/ame]