[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APD] Heating, etc
> This is an example of a free society at its worst, when a small number of
> activists and the uninformed can sway the majority away from the only
> logical way of meeting our long term energy needs without the environmental
> disaster that the only alternative, coal, would cause. However, even
> extreme environmentalists are starting to understand that, so there is hope.
I never stated that clean coal and shale weren't good alternatives.
Hey if you don't want to go nuclear, clean coal and shale is the way
to go. I don't claim to be an expert on energy harvesting, but IMHO
nuclear panic attacks are widely unfounded.
> And to be sure that this has an aquatic plant element, several of the hydro
> lakes in the northwest USA have recently had BGA outbreaks severe enough to
> have made the Havaria world wide "emergencies" map, in August, I believe.
What does cyanobacteria have to do with nuclear plants?
Bill said to Jerry:
> No, but they are responsible for the extermination of runs of Atlantic and
> Pacific Salmon, steelhead trout, and a number of other species and strains
> of anadromous fish, and have devastated entire watersheds.
The pork and cattle industry are responsible for the most water
contamination than any other cause. Does this mean you will stop
eating pork or beef? I have.
Point is that stupid humans pollute, not inanimate objects or
elements. If you take 20,000 hogs and put them insufferable
conditions so that old joe six pack can buy pork bologna for $1 - well
you know what they say - what goes around comes around. The factory
torture "farm"'s runoff will pollute the wells. There is no doubting
that. This is not a wild claim, I saw a documentary about this on the
documentary channel about the mega farm idea destroying the Quebec
countryside. I'll get you the name of the film if you want.
> It would be interesting to compare and contrast the number of injuries that
> are caused each year by the "leakage' of anything from nuclear power plants,
> to the number of deaths and injuries that come directly from the mining of
> coal every year in this country. I think the score is about 50 deaths and
> 25,000 injuries zero, but I could be wrong.
The "accidental" pollution casualty factor for coal and shale is less
than nuclear energy, perhaps I'll grant you that, but if the industry
was regulated better, we wouldn't have any of the aforementioned
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com