What's new
By:

How is fracking legal?

NAOS said:
The Nazi's are deeply identified with their industrially managed program of genocide. Not enough of them (or the people they dominated) cared about the existence of a whole group of sentient beings, and tens of millions of murders were committed.


so, with respect to the existence of cats, where do you stand exactly? Are cats like electricity wires (loved that example, btw)? Or are they just somebody else's business, and you're too busy ****ing up your own life to care?
Click to expand...
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. No matter what I say, you will continue your idiocy. That missing chromosome you're dealing with prevents you from understanding.
 
bigb said:
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. No matter what I say, you will continue your idiocy. That missing chromosome you're dealing with prevents you from understanding.
Click to expand...

You need to be surveilled.
 
fracking in itself isn't illegal.. unless of course you pay for it.. well, unless you're in NV but not on the strip.
 
bigb said:
To be fair, he turns five in two weeks.I asked him if there is difference between hating cats and not caring about cats. He said "yes, hating cats means you don't like them and not not caring means you don't want to play with them". Why is this so hard?
Click to expand...

you're incredibly dense.
 
NAOS comes across as that odd lady in the office that always smells of cat urine. You know, the single older lady types that lives with pets an cuts there hair short to match an animals.
 
♪alt13 said:
google "wind power habitat destruction" if you want to read more.

or maybe you wanted a link that shows that habitat destruction is a bigger threat to wildlife than cats? Or one that shows that split level homes don't directly kill bears?
Click to expand...

I've yet to see anything in academic literature that sees wind as prohibitive due to its potential for habitat destruction, especially relative to the other renewable energy technologies generally mentioned (fission, hydro, solar).

Again, links? You're the one who made the point, I don't need to do the googling.
 
dalamon said:
I've yet to see anything in academic literature that sees wind as prohibitive due to its potential for habitat destruction, especially relative to the other renewable energy technologies generally mentioned (fission, hydro, solar).

Again, links? You're the one who made the point, I don't need to do the googling.
Click to expand...

I never said it was more destructive(although I suspect it's more destructive than rooftop solar but that's only part of the solution anyway). I simply said that habitat destruction is a bigger issue than the numbers killed in a given year. Habitat destruction is the largest threat to wildlife. I've never heard otherwise. If you haven't seen anything about wind and habitat destruction then you just have been willfully ignoring it. No link that I could provide is going to change willful ignorance.

I'm not even anti-wind. I just recognize that it will come with some serious costs to wildlife. We can't just start putting up windmills all willy-nilly.
 
♪alt13 said:
I never said it was more destructive(although I suspect it's more destructive than rooftop solar but that's only part of the solution anyway).
Click to expand...

When you phrase it as "I think the real issue you're implying that it's an issue relative to the other proposed forms of energy whether generated in a "green" manner or through fossil fuels


I simply said that habitat destruction is a bigger issue than the numbers killed in a given year. Habitat destruction is the largest threat to wildlife. I've never heard otherwise. If you haven't seen anything about wind and habitat destruction then you just have been willfully ignoring it. No link that I could provide is going to change willful ignorance.
Click to expand...


Where's the literature comparing the impact of habitat destruction brought forth by wind farms in comparison to fossil fuels, solar, hydro, nuclear, etc.? Obviously there's more to ecology than the number of killed animals per annum (no one is arguing otherwise) and this isn't me pretending that wind farms don't alter local ecology, but you're definitely framing the discussion in a way that makes a reader interpret wind farms as especially harmful to non-human habitats. That's why I'm asking for a link-- where's the link describing wind energy as especially environmentally harmful relative to other forms of energy? Simply saying "habitat destruction" is basically applicable to every form of green and non-green energy 'production' and it doesn't really do much to advance dialogue in any sense

I'm not even anti-wind. I just recognize that it will come with some serious costs to wildlife. We can't just start putting up windmills all willy-nilly.
Click to expand...


Real costs to wildlife relative to what? It's like saying LEDs give off waste energy. Yeah, um they definitely do-- but it's peanuts relative to an incandescent. We don't have the time to twirl our thumbs waiting for the perfect energy source. We need to switch to what's better, and we need to switch yesterday.
 
dalamon said:
When you phrase it as "I think the real issue you're implying that it's an issue relative to the other proposed forms of energy whether generated in a "green" manner or through fossil fuels





Where's the literature comparing the impact of habitat destruction brought forth by wind farms in comparison to fossil fuels, solar, hydro, nuclear, etc.? Obviously there's more to ecology than the number of killed animals per annum (no one is arguing otherwise) and this isn't me pretending that wind farms don't alter local ecology, but you're definitely framing the discussion in a way that makes a reader interpret wind farms as especially harmful to non-human habitats. That's why I'm asking for a link-- where's the link describing wind energy as especially environmentally harmful relative to other forms of energy? Simply saying "habitat destruction" is basically applicable to every form of green and non-green energy 'production' and it doesn't really do much to advance dialogue in any sense




Real costs to wildlife relative to what? It's like saying LEDs give off waste energy. Yeah, um they definitely do-- but it's peanuts relative to an incandescent. We don't have the time to twirl our thumbs waiting for the perfect energy source. We need to switch to what's better, and we need to switch yesterday.
Click to expand...

Your link was about bird deaths, the first on the list was cats which has nothing to do with energy production. Relative to deaths the real issue is habitat destruction. The real issue is birds that will never be.

Relative to not being a fanboy of one or the other. Wind is appropriate sometimes, sometimes it's not.
 
♪alt13 said:
Your link was about bird deaths, the first on the list was cats which has nothing to do with energy production. Relative to deaths the real issue is habitat destruction. The real issue is birds that will never be.
Click to expand...

Where is your proof of wind farms seriously harming bird populations (like, via migratory patterns or whatever) past simply the killing of them in adulthood?

--

Oh, and FYI here's just one quick article of how "green" solar really is, from a prof who studies solar https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/solar-energy-isnt-always-as-green-as-you-think
 
dalamon said:
Where is your proof of wind farms seriously harming bird populations (like, via migratory patterns or whatever) past simply the killing of them in adulthood?

--

Oh, and FYI here's just one quick article of how "green" solar really is, from a prof who studies solar https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/solar-energy-isnt-always-as-green-as-you-think
Click to expand...

srsly dude you're a biased googler. it took me like 2 seconds to find this

I’m a lecturer in biological and human sciences at Oxford university. I trained as a zoologist, I’ve worked as an environmental consultant — conducting impact assessments on projects like the Folkestone-to-London rail link — and I now teach ecology and conservation.


Loss of habitat is the single biggest cause of species extinction. Wind farms not only reduce habitat size but create ‘population sinks’ — zones which attract animals and then kill them
Click to expand...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/01/wind-farms-vs-wildlife/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top