Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [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 05-15-2014, 10:51 AM
 
12,973 posts, read 15,793,565 times
Reputation: 5478

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kapie9969 View Post
It should only take a few million wind turbines and a thousand square miles of solar panels to equal the power of one nuclear reactor. Of course everyone is happy to have these bird killing monsters in their backyard?
Its a nice idea,like magic powers.But in reality? Remote cabins and people who can adapt to using less power are the main users of soar and wind.
I use a few panels and a battery bank. Its ok for limited use.
Takes about 500 of the new wind turbine to equal a nuke. Take 3 or 4 solar direct or 4 or 5 PV solar plants.

Take about a 100,000 roof top units to equal a nuke.

Not the full story as a nuke can maintain its output for 24 hours a day for long periods. But probably true for peak usage.

I would think Nuke and Coal both get replaced by natural gas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-15-2014, 11:25 AM
 
7,280 posts, read 10,943,455 times
Reputation: 11491
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
I think the subject was use of public land. I do find plenty of private land ownwers ready and willing to lease wind easements.

The willingness to lease lands has nothing to do with surplus either and absolutely nothing to do with traveling to know it.

Since you brought up traveling and stated that obviously I haven't, what I do know is that I have and learned first hand that there is very little land in this country not owned or set aside for public use.

No, the subject wasn't use of public land, it was your accusation regarding how much I've traveled. I recognize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 11:42 AM
 
12,973 posts, read 15,793,565 times
Reputation: 5478
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
There is land where no ATV should be allowed. There is land where limited ATV use is appropriate. There is land where nobody gives a damn about what ATV owners want to do.

I don't see why we should have sport ATVs operate in National Parks. People can hike in.

I am fine with modest use in National Forests, but not fine with ATV tearing up the soil on the slopes. That will lead to erosion.

I'm fine with concessions setting up ATV parks on some federal land after an environmental assessment.

Hopefully I didn't use too many big words.
Tricky. I am an old hiker who can't anymore. I have a range of about 1/4 mile on the level. Can't get on a horse either. So I don't get to go to any of the interesting places anymore?

You one of those elitists trying to keep those of us no longer physical perfect out of the nice places in the national parks?

I will agree that Puppy Dome is now past my abilities and that an accommodation is not workable. But there are a lot of places I could go if allowed...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
16,569 posts, read 15,261,600 times
Reputation: 14590
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
You obviously are a low information poster. All renewable energy projects on federal land are check in advance with either an environmental assessment or and environmental impact statement. The same law as applies to a pipeline. All the environmental studies are filed along with the records of decision.
" All the environmental studies are filed along with the records of decision" my foot. How long XL has been "under review" and yet solar and wind farms spring up like dandelions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
16,569 posts, read 15,261,600 times
Reputation: 14590
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Take about a 100,000 roof top units to equal a nuke.
How about biofuels? You need a farm the size of the Northeast to replace a fraction of the gasoline used today. It takes 128,500 acres of corn to feed one ethanol plant a year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 01:05 PM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,987,381 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Tricky. I am an old hiker who can't anymore. I have a range of about 1/4 mile on the level. Can't get on a horse either. So I don't get to go to any of the interesting places anymore?
Yep

Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
You one of those elitists trying to keep those of us no longer physical perfect out of the nice places in the national parks?
Yep

Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
I will agree that Puppy Dome is now past my abilities and that an accommodation is not workable. But there are a lot of places I could go if allowed...
Walk or take a pony cart.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 01:07 PM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,987,381 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider View Post
" All the environmental studies are filed along with the records of decision" my foot. How long XL has been "under review" and yet solar and wind farms spring up like dandelions.
Because those projects completed their EAs and there were no issues. XL has major environmental issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2014, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Volcano
12,969 posts, read 28,422,673 times
Reputation: 10759
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider View Post
" All the environmental studies are filed along with the records of decision" my foot. How long XL has been "under review" and yet solar and wind farms spring up like dandelions.
Sorry, but I'm afraid you're just not well informed on this topic. The reason wind farms have been "springing up like dandelions," AFTER thorough environmental reviews, is that in general they are far, far less hazardous to the environment than ANYTHING involving fossil fuels. Even so, not all of the applications for wind turbines are approved, and proposed sites are being turned down for a variety of issues, including being too close to migratory bird routes. This is appropriate, to reduce their impact on bird populations. That's the point of environmental reviews, to look at the entire picture, including long term impacts, and make intelligent decisions that respect the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
Because those projects completed their EAs and there were no issues. XL has major environmental issues.
Exactly. Tar sand oil is the most polluting of the various forms of crude oil produced, and pipeline breaks and spills are a huge concern, especially since the proposed route was to cross environmentally sensitive lands. Also the amount of toxic waste to be generated at the southern end of the pipeline would be considerable and cause a major disposal issue, as well as placing beleagured and endangered wetlands at even higher risk than they already are.

And now it has come out that this oil is more explosive than usual, which has already caused a number of issues with truck, train and pipeline safety. Already there is a big hue and cry to stop shipping this crude in existing oil truck and tank cars because it is too dangerous.

And since the proposed pipeline would cross a national border, and be approved by the State Department, as well as crossing a number of states along the way, it has to pass a higher level of scrutiny, and more levels of review.

Ultimately the fact that this huge, arguably dangerous project would only generate 60 permanent jobs, according to their filings, and that the main beneficiary of it being approved would be the Koch Brothers, who stand to make hundreds of million$, possibly billions$ more profit if it is approved, has lead the American public to turn against it in large numbers, which has lead to a predictable delay in making any decision.

By contrast, getting approval to site large windfarms in the sparsely populated ranches and fields of the West is a piece of cake, comparatively speaking.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Green Living

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top