U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
6,623 posts, read 12,768,172 times
Reputation: 3051

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
I'll bet the same people upset that a snail might become extinct aren't very upset about the wind farms taking out thousands of birds.
Meanwhile house cats take out 4 million birds a year...what of it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Cumberland Co., TN
22,146 posts, read 21,871,950 times
Reputation: 21622
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Why would that be great?
Because it can take the state two years to approve a permit application for a survey that needs to be completed in a certain time frame.
Why would it not be great for the state to move in a respectable time table.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:04 AM
 
14,208 posts, read 6,494,682 times
Reputation: 14652
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Because it can take the state two years to approve a permit application for a survey that needs to be completed in a certain time frame.
Why would it not be great for the state to move in a respectable time table.
Because they should do a thorough & accurate environmental impact study instead of just bulldozing thru, thatís why.

I cannot for the life of me understand why those on the right have such disdain for the environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Long Island
33,534 posts, read 14,133,361 times
Reputation: 7181
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
What has any of this to do with removing species from the endangered list, climate change or extinction.

The person was claiming it was hard to remove species that recovered? Climate change is certainly a factor with the extinction of species that are being migrating to other areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:11 AM
 
13,210 posts, read 4,546,412 times
Reputation: 6478
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Because they should do a thorough & accurate environmental impact study instead of just bulldozing thru, thatís why.

I cannot for the life of me understand why those on the right have such disdain for the environment.
If it's such a concern to you why did you have children? Are you telling your children not to have children? No? Then you're a raging hypocrite. As the population increases you need to take more land from the animal kingdom causing more stress on their survival and putting them in this position to begin with. But back to the topic at hand, this is nothing. All they did was use the same criteria they use for marine life. If it's good enough for that it's good enough for land life too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:12 AM
Status: "Quo Fata Farunt" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Self explanatory
11,871 posts, read 5,020,936 times
Reputation: 15873
Funny that these laws brought the Bald Eagle back from potential extinction, but Trump supporters don't care about this, and have the audacity to call anyone who questions Trump a commie. What bumper sticker patriots, lol.

Economic interests are apparently far more interesting than anything else.

Poor Donald.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:13 AM
 
14,208 posts, read 6,494,682 times
Reputation: 14652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones View Post
If it's such a concern to you why did you have children? Are you telling your children not to have children? No? Then you're a raging hypocrite. As the population increases you need to take more land from the animal kingdom causing more stress on their survival and putting them in this position to begin with. But back to the topic at hand, this is nothing. All they did was use the same criteria they use for marine life. If it's good enough for that it's good enough for land life too.
Lol, your little misinformed rant was amusing. No kids, thank god.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:13 AM
 
39,712 posts, read 41,077,500 times
Reputation: 16431
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Why would that be great?

There is significant expense involved with this, it's not just the cost of the review but delays and other things that add up. When you hear of cost overruns for infrastructure projects this is the major reason why. A bridge that should cost $200K ends up costing 1 million. This one of the major reasons for the delays and cost overruns of the bullet train in CA as real world example.



A few years ago Exxon partnered with the Chinese to build a refinery in China, something like 2 years from proposal to completion. If they were building that here after two years they would still be litigating whether they could build it all let alone starting the review process, a project like that may take decade or two here and cost twice as much built to the same exact specifications. I'm not suggesting we lower our standards to the Chinese but realize there is enormous amount of expense doing large infrastructure projects and those costs get passed onto you the consumer/taxpayer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Cumberland Co., TN
22,146 posts, read 21,871,950 times
Reputation: 21622
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Because they should do a thorough & accurate environmental impact study instead of just bulldozing thru, thatís why.

I cannot for the life of me understand why those on the right have such disdain for the environment.
I'm talking about getting the permit to do the environmental impact study.
The thorough and accurate environmental impact study that must be done before any construction begins.
No where did I say the companies should get the go ahead before studies are conducted.

It should not take the environmental firm 2 years to get a permit issued on a submitted application nor should it take two years to get a permit to preform work once all required surveys and reports have been submitted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:21 AM
 
34,598 posts, read 41,782,155 times
Reputation: 30053
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
The NYT? I'll wait for a rundown from an unbiased source
Well take your pick =
https://www.google.ca/search?source=...i3._m88xx1bOzg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top