Posted on 05/31/2007 11:54:56 AM PDT by ventanax5
Al Gore has been hectoring Americans to pare back their lifestyles to fight global warming. But if Mr. Gore wants us to rethink our priorities in the face of this mother of all environmental threats, surely he has convinced his fellow greens to rethink theirs, right?
Wrong. If their opposition to the Klamath hydroelectric dams in the Pacific Northwest is any indication, the greens, it appears, are just as unwilling to sacrifice their pet causes as a Texas rancher is to sacrifice his pickup truck. If anything, the radicalization of the environmental movement is the bigger obstacle to addressing global warming than the allegedly gluttonous American way of life.
Once regarded as the symbol of national greatness, hydroelectric dams have now fallen into disrepute for many legitimate reasons. They are enormously expensive undertakings that would never have taken off but for hefty government subsidies. Worse, they typically involve changing the natural course of rivers, causing painful disruptions for towns and tribes. But tearing down the Klamath dams, the last of which was completed in 1962, will do more harm than good at this stage. These dams provide cheap, renewable energy to 70,000 homes in Oregon and California. Replacing this energy with natural gas--the cleanest fossil-fuel source--would still pump 473,000 tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. This is roughly equal to the annual emissions of 102,000 cars.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Cape Cod liberals will sacrifice energy independence not to spoil the view of Nantucket Sound with those pesky windmills.
Damn Salmon!
Damn the Salmon! Full skreed ahead!.........
Can’t please a greenie.
Please read and review the following linked thread before posting again:
Updated FR Excerpt and Link Only or Deny Posting List due to Copyright Complaints
Greens are not about the environment. Greens merely want America’s growth, progress, power, independence and influence to be diminished. Once viewed through that lens, everything they do makes sense.
Back in the day when tree huggers sported bumper stickers on their hippy vans that said "Split Wood Not Atoms" and staged protests over any expansion of nuclear power they were in fact encouraging more greenhouse gases.
It’s not only the CC libs....I also am against them pesky windmills cause they’ll creat off-shore structure for baitfish to hang around, thereby drawing the predators that I like to catch (and release)....to the windmills.
...and I’m a strict shore fly fishing type of guy that’ll miss the stripers and blues.....the boat guys will have a blast though.
I assume you do most of your casting near Race Point?
Nope....Race Point won’t be bothered by the windmills....and it’s too close to “them” (/sarcasm)
South Cape Beach to West Dennis Beach on the south side is notorious for blue sand stripers cruising for baitfish....Monomoy flats in Chatham is unmatched....and northside Dennis flats are always a great place to hit in the wee hours.
Take 130 windmills on the south side at night....with 130 high intensity lights to ward off aircraft and such.....and they’ll attract a large portion of the fish out to the structure.
Good for some...bad for me.
My son caught one near there 10 years ago and I cooked a thick fillet of blue by making a crabstuffing to lay on top of it in the oven.
Isn't that what it all boils down to? And that's why serious policy makers need to ignore the greenies until they're willing to sit down and compromise like adults. But I'm not holding my breath.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.