EPA doing its job, no wonder so many panties in a wad!

[westwall]

Hydroelectric is not an enviro-nut approved source, because it interferes with turtles humping, and we can't have that.

Quite completely wrong. Hydro power has always been ecologically compatible. Of course, ecologists are concerned about insuring that there are environmental accommodations made for unique habitats and at risk populations, but this does not mean that anyone would rather have ten coal fired power plants in the place of one medium size dam.

In general, most intelligent and informed individuals realize that it is impractical to try and immediately end all fossil-fuel energy generation and fuel usage. But it is obvious that these particular carbon fuels and most importantly, their combustion products must be phased out over the coming few decades.

Sustainable Alternative Energy sources, from my perspective includes:

Nuclear, Hydro-electric, geothermal, wind, solar (thermal and PV), tidal, wave, biofuels, and a host of various combinations and varients of these. Virtually, the only sources to be removed are the previously sequestered fossil fuels, coal, oil and gas.

Maybe you should tell these folks that. Seems the right hand hasn't a clue what the left hand is saying eh what! This is only four of the HUNDREDS of environmental reports talking about the negative impact of hydroelectric dams. Seems you don't know much about the environmental impact of dams at all, nor how the rest of the environmental groups feel about them. WHOOPSIE!

http://www.fwee.org/hpar.html

Environmental Impact of Hydroelectric Dams

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY | Joint Review Panel Submits Environmental Assessment Report For Proposed Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project

What are the Negative Effects of Building Large Hydroelectric Dams?

 

[tonystewart1]

2 Peter 3:10

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

 

[FactFinder]

It is immoral to pollute the Earth as God tell us that in the Bible. And it's immoral to pollute the Earth for the sake of money.
Anyone want to debate that?


All I want is you to quote the scriptures for where it tells us it is immoral to pollute the earth. Then we may have something to debate.

FYI: My understanding is that we are to take dominion over the earth and to be good stewards but it escapes me this polluting bit. What is that anyway?

Numbers 35:33-34
"You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it. You shall not defile the land in which you live, in the midst of which I dwell, for I the Lord dwell in the midst of the people of Israel.”

Jeremiah 2:7
"And I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination."

Genesis 2:15
"And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it."

Genesis 2:15 (King James Version) :: Forerunner Commentary :: Bible Tools

Genesis 2:15



To environmentalists, letting man have dominion over the animals and being told to subdue the earth means that God gives man free rein to do anything he wants to the planet—bend it to his uses and abuses, rape it of all its beauty and diversity—for his own benefit. "Does not the land have any rights?" they cry. "What about the plants and animals, birds and fish? What gives us the right to mine and burn and kill without care for nature?"

Certainly, God did not give man the authority to degrade and destroy His earth. Environmentalists are correct in saying that mankind should consider and address environmental concerns. They are quite wrong, however, to blame God for the earth's ecological problems; He is not responsible for man's destruction of the natural world.

To think that God gave man carte blanche to plunder and destroy the earth is simply ludicrous. He is its Creator! Why would He immediately command Adam to ruin it? Would any woodworker, upon just finishing a beautifully stained piece of furniture, tell his son to break it up for firewood? No! Just as God desires for His creation, the woodworker would put his handiwork to use and also care for it by keeping it waxed and dusted to prolong its life.

This is exactly what God told Adam. Genesis 2 contains a parallel account of creation, adding detail to certain parts of the narrative of the first chapter. Notice God's expanded instruction: "Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend [dress, KJV] and keep it" (verse 15). This greatly modifies the force of "have dominion" and "subdue it" from Genesis 1:26, 28!

Tend (Hebrew 'abad) means "to work or serve," and thus referring to the ground or a garden, it can be defined as "to till or cultivate." It possesses the nuance seen in the KJV's choice in its translation: "dress," implying adornment, embellishment, and improvement.

Keep (Hebrew shamar) means "to exercise great care over." In the context of Genesis 2:15, it expresses God's wish that mankind, in the person of Adam, "take care of," "guard," or "watch over" the garden. A caretaker maintains and protects his charge so that he can return it to its owner in as good or better condition than when he received it.

To Noah, God gives a similar command after the Flood:

So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. (Genesis 9:1-2)

Once again God gives man dominion over all other life on the earth, and with this renewed authority comes the implicit responsibility to tend and keep what was explicitly given to Adam. In this post-Flood world, God gives mankind a second chance to use and preserve the resources He had so abundantly provided. To that end Noah, after 120 years as a preacher and shipwright, took up farming and planted a vineyard (verse 20). We can assume, from what we know of human nature, that this attitude of stewardship did not pass to very many of his descendants.

Read more: Genesis 2:15 (King James Version) :: Forerunner Commentary :: Bible Tools

More available upon request.

Sounds like you shouldn't murder or sin. But..we knew that didn't we? I'm not hearing anything about pollution, heh? Well unless you stretch its definiton perhaps.

 

[gslack]

trakar, grow a spine and defend a position for once... You made an absolute statement, I and west both called you on it and you ignore it and make a new one... WTH, you want to have people respect you on here or be categorized a useless posturing ass?

 

[bripat9643]

I've only known two types of "independents" those who are too extremist and too pissed off at the party they'd rather be represented by, and those too busy and uninterested in political BS to recognize any real difference in either party.

Personally, I'm proud to be a Republican, though "conservatives" are a huge problem in our party and have made a mockery of everything that being Republican once meant. Republicans were the original Progressive party and we can trace the roots of progressivism from Jefferson to Teddy Roosevelt to Lincoln and Eisenhower. Not many progressive republican leaders of the last half century, but that's mostly due to the liberal left's distortionist slanders corrupting the popular understanding of what true progressivism means and stands for.

the so-called "progressives" all switched over to the Democrat Party, dipstick. Your problem is that you're in the wrong party. One thing this country doesn't need is two leftwing parties. The Republican Party certainly doesn't need any RINO dipsticks like you.

 

[bripat9643]

Let's talk about the morality of pollution and regulating pollution.
First of all, the Bible is full of versus about taking care of God's Earth. It is immoral to pollute the Earth as God tell us that in the Bible. And it's immoral to pollute the Earth for the sake of money.
Anyone want to debate that?
How about the slow genocide of the Earth's people by poisoning the air, water and ground. Is that moral?
Anyone?

You can't live without polluting the Earth. Ergo, it's immoral for you to live.

Now go blow your brains out.

 

[gslack]

Trakar I am still waiting on you to tell me what Republican values you agree with and how you agree with them. I am also waiting on you to tell me how you consider Eisenhower a progressive, when in fact he was and is considered a conservative in fact one of the leading factors in the cold war and nuclear deterrent...

 

[Ernie S.]

New generation means new generation.

What it means is only wind generation is getting permits to build and go on line.
What chaps my ass is that you enviro-wackos always talk about capacity of the bird grinders, never output.

 

[Old Rocks]

I've only known two types of "independents" those who are too extremist and too pissed off at the party they'd rather be represented by, and those too busy and uninterested in political BS to recognize any real difference in either party.

Personally, I'm proud to be a Republican, though "conservatives" are a huge problem in our party and have made a mockery of everything that being Republican once meant. Republicans were the original Progressive party and we can trace the roots of progressivism from Jefferson to Teddy Roosevelt to Lincoln and Eisenhower. Not many progressive republican leaders of the last half century, but that's mostly due to the liberal left's distortionist slanders corrupting the popular understanding of what true progressivism means and stands for.

the so-called "progressives" all switched over to the Democrat Party, dipstick. Your problem is that you're in the wrong party. One thing this country doesn't need is two leftwing parties. The Republican Party certainly doesn't need any RINO dipsticks like you.

LOL. So a pissant knownothing like you is going to tell everybody who may and may not be a Republican.

 

[Old Rocks]

New generation means new generation.

What it means is only wind generation is getting permits to build and go on line.
What chaps my ass is that you enviro-wackos always talk about capacity of the bird grinders, never output.

Wind Energy - Iowa Life Changing

Iowa ranks second nationally in current wind generation output with 3,675 megawatts installed with 2,534 turbines across the state. (AWEA, 2010).
Iowa leads the nation in wind generation as percentage of total power output at 17-20%. (Iowa Utilities Board, 2010)
Des Moines, Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Company is second among all investor-owned utilities in ownership of wind energy farms with about 3,129 MW in production. (AWEA, 2010)
Iowa is a magnet for wind energy manufacturing companies, attracted by Iowa’s strong manufacturing base, excellent transportation infrastructure and skilled workforce. As of April 2010, nine international manufacturing companies have located in Iowa (IDED, 2010).

 

[Ernie S.]

I'll read up on Iowa but I suspect that large percentage is based on capacity, not actual output. Interesting reading, here:

 

[Ernie S.]

OK.... woop de do! Iowa produces a lot of turbines. Does it produce electricity? and how much of it's rated capacity actually makes it to the grid? How many fuel burning plants have been shut down because their output has been replaced by wind power?

 

[bripat9643]

LOL. So a pissant knownothing like you is going to tell everybody who may and may not be a Republican.

It's a semi-free country, dipstick. I'm free to offer my opinion, just like everyone else.

 

[bripat9643]

Wind Energy - Iowa Life Changing

Iowa ranks second nationally in current wind generation output with 3,675 megawatts installed with 2,534 turbines across the state. (AWEA, 2010).
Iowa leads the nation in wind generation as percentage of total power output at 17-20%. (Iowa Utilities Board, 2010)
Des Moines, Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Company is second among all investor-owned utilities in ownership of wind energy farms with about 3,129 MW in production. (AWEA, 2010)
Iowa is a magnet for wind energy manufacturing companies, attracted by Iowa’s strong manufacturing base, excellent transportation infrastructure and skilled workforce. As of April 2010, nine international manufacturing companies have located in Iowa (IDED, 2010).

A single coal fired power plant can put out 4,000 megawatts.

 

[Ernie S.]

And it does that 24 hours a day, 365 days a year no matter the weather. a 1.5MW wind turbine, very rarely produces 1.5MW. It likely averages about 300KW so the coal fired plants still have to run, at least in stand-by mode, still burning about 75% of their normal fuel. The only power source that can be shut down fairly quickly to balance output is Hydro.

 

[daveman]

Renewable is over 10% at present. Solar and geothermal have yet to be a factor.

Renewables are over 10%? DoE says otherwise:

Year-to-date, coal-fired plants contributed 43.6 percent of the power generated in the United States. Natural gas-fired plants contributed 21.7 percent, and nuclear plants contributed 19.4 percent. Of the 0.8 percent contributed by petroleum-fired plants, petroleum liquids accounted for approximately 0.4 percent and petroleum coke accounted for roughly 0.3 percent. Conventional hydroelectric sources provided 9.0 percent of the total, while other renewables (biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind) and other miscellaneous energy sources generated the remaining 5.5 percent of electric power (Figure 2).​

Hydroelectric is not an enviro-nut approved source, because it interferes with turtles humping, and we can't have that. So where do you get your 10% figure? Just make it up?

Oh, and look what else I found:

Only around a quarter of the new electricity capacity introduced in 2010 came from wind power, down from 42 percent in 2009, according to a report from the U.S. Department of Energy.

The average cost of installing new wind power held steady in 2010, while the cost of other forms of electricity fell, according to the report.

--

The key problems remain building and maintaining new transmission lines, according to the report. It’s easy enough to generate electricity from a wind turbine, but more difficult to move it from point A to point B. It’s a problem that all new types of renewable energy face, Asmus said.​

Your growth curve is plateauing.

Were we to get serious about replacing coal, we could do that in a generation. We won't, and our children and grandchildren will pay the price of the willfull ignorance and greed of the present generation.

Can't you make a case without resorting to fear-mongering?

No, it doesn't look like you can.

Really dumb statement to make to someone on the west coast. You see, we had an abundance of salmon, which we have nearly lost because of failing to make a way for the fish to get past the dams. Now we are working to rectify that situation. From blowing dams that are not that useful, to building new ways for the fish to get around the dams, to creating spawning beds for the salmon.

You realize you proved me right, don't you?

No...you probably don't.

 

[daveman]

Tell me how you build a windmill without steel?

And how do you make steel without coal?

You buy it from China and blame the GOP.

Right, USMB lefties?

All most all modern furnaces recycling scrap are powered by electricity. The amount of steel used in windmills is not that great, mostly the supporting tube. And the mill I work at rolls most of the steel used in the tubes that are used in Oregon. We get our electricity from Bonneville, which is primarily hydro, with a lot of wind in the mix now.

"A lot"? Not really.

 

[kiwiman127]

It is immoral to pollute the Earth as God tell us that in the Bible. And it's immoral to pollute the Earth for the sake of money.
Anyone want to debate that?


All I want is you to quote the scriptures for where it tells us it is immoral to pollute the earth. Then we may have something to debate.

FYI: My understanding is that we are to take dominion over the earth and to be good stewards but it escapes me this polluting bit. What is that anyway?

Numbers 35:33-34 "You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it. You shall not defile the land in which you live, in the midst of which I dwell, for I the Lord dwell in the midst of the people of Israel.”

Jeremiah 2:7 "And I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination."

Isaiah 24: 4-6 "The earth mourns and withers; the world languishes and withers; the highest people of the earth languish. The earth lies defiled under its inhabitants; for they have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse devours the earth, and its inhabitants suffer for their guilt; therefore the inhabitants of the earth are scorched, and few men are left"

Leviticus 18:24 "Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: 27 (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled 28 That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you"

 

[tonystewart1]

It is immoral to pollute the Earth as God tell us that in the Bible. And it's immoral to pollute the Earth for the sake of money.
Anyone want to debate that?


All I want is you to quote the scriptures for where it tells us it is immoral to pollute the earth. Then we may have something to debate.

FYI: My understanding is that we are to take dominion over the earth and to be good stewards but it escapes me this polluting bit. What is that anyway?

Numbers 35:33-34 "You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it. You shall not defile the land in which you live, in the midst of which I dwell, for I the Lord dwell in the midst of the people of Israel.”

Jeremiah 2:7 "And I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination."

Isaiah 24: 4-6 "The earth mourns and withers; the world languishes and withers; the highest people of the earth languish. The earth lies defiled under its inhabitants; for they have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse devours the earth, and its inhabitants suffer for their guilt; therefore the inhabitants of the earth are scorched, and few men are left"

Leviticus 18:24 "Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: 27 (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled 28 That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you"

2 Peter 3:10

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Sound like to me that the Lord has plans to do away with this planet once Christ returns.

The bible does not promote enviromental policy.

Most of the verses quoted above refer to defiling the land with sin not mercury.

 

[westwall]

Renewables are over 10%? DoE says otherwise:

Year-to-date, coal-fired plants contributed 43.6 percent of the power generated in the United States. Natural gas-fired plants contributed 21.7 percent, and nuclear plants contributed 19.4 percent. Of the 0.8 percent contributed by petroleum-fired plants, petroleum liquids accounted for approximately 0.4 percent and petroleum coke accounted for roughly 0.3 percent. Conventional hydroelectric sources provided 9.0 percent of the total, while other renewables (biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind) and other miscellaneous energy sources generated the remaining 5.5 percent of electric power (Figure 2).​

Hydroelectric is not an enviro-nut approved source, because it interferes with turtles humping, and we can't have that. So where do you get your 10% figure? Just make it up?

Oh, and look what else I found:

Only around a quarter of the new electricity capacity introduced in 2010 came from wind power, down from 42 percent in 2009, according to a report from the U.S. Department of Energy.

The average cost of installing new wind power held steady in 2010, while the cost of other forms of electricity fell, according to the report.

--

The key problems remain building and maintaining new transmission lines, according to the report. It’s easy enough to generate electricity from a wind turbine, but more difficult to move it from point A to point B. It’s a problem that all new types of renewable energy face, Asmus said.​

Your growth curve is plateauing.

Can't you make a case without resorting to fear-mongering?

No, it doesn't look like you can.

Really dumb statement to make to someone on the west coast. You see, we had an abundance of salmon, which we have nearly lost because of failing to make a way for the fish to get past the dams. Now we are working to rectify that situation. From blowing dams that are not that useful, to building new ways for the fish to get around the dams, to creating spawning beds for the salmon.

You realize you proved me right, don't you?

No...you probably don't.

No, olfraud doesn't understand most things.