Great! Further wasting of tax payer's $$...

Great! Further wasting of tax payer's $$...
As they should be. That many LEOs are too lazy to enforce the laws on the books isn't surprising but also doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to limit things harmful to the environment.One can be written a citation for throwing out a cigarette butt or even a candy wrapper. I doubt any LEO would write a ticket for releasing a balloon even though it is probably more damaging to the environment.
Organized releases, not accidental ones and a little bit of common sense.So, what would be considered the acceptable number of balloons to be released with one more being a criminal event?
I can agree with that. We need to ban wind farms. Those giant windmills are not only destructive to the actual beauty of the landscape but they are also not recyclable and actually use a large amount of oil for lubrication.As they should be. That many LEOs are too lazy to enforce the laws on the books isn't surprising but also doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to limit things harmful to the environment.
Actually, they are largely recyclable. Australia is hitting up to 95%, as is the company Siemens. The oil they use for lubrication is tiny in proportion to engines which actually burn oil. As for aesthetics, that's individual taste. I don't find them attractive in Germany, where it seems every ridge has a line of them. OTOH, I don't think offshore drilling rigs are very attractive either...I can agree with that. We need to ban wind farms. Those giant windmills are not only destructive to the actual beauty of the landscape but they are also not recyclable and actually use a large amount of oil for lubrication.
Using oil without burning it does not contribute to global warming. We need oil for food production (fertilizer). We DON'T need to be burning it.Actually, they are largely recyclable. Australia is hitting up to 95%, as is the company Siemens. The oil they use for lubrication is tiny in proportion to engines which actually burn oil. As for aesthetics, that's individual taste. I don't find them attractive in Germany, where it seems every ridge has a line of them. OTOH, I don't think offshore drilling rigs are very attractive either...
Not to mention they cause cancer.I can agree with that. We need to ban wind farms. Those giant windmills are not only destructive to the actual beauty of the landscape but they are also not recyclable and actually use a large amount of oil for lubrication.
Your response intrigued me so I went looking. From what I found, the older mills had smaller gearboxes used about 10 gallons of oil for lubrication. Current, newer mills gearboxes are much larger and require about 60 gallons of oil. They also need to have the oil changed out from 18 months to every 3 years. That is A LOT more oil than oil used in engines.Actually, they are largely recyclable. Australia is hitting up to 95%, as is the company Siemens. The oil they use for lubrication is tiny in proportion to engines which actually burn oil. As for aesthetics, that's individual taste. I don't find them attractive in Germany, where it seems every ridge has a line of them. OTOH, I don't think offshore drilling rigs are very attractive either...
Using oil without burning it does not contribute to global warming. We need oil for food production (fertilizer). We DON'T need to be burning it.
Diesel engines can burn whatever they want and not add to global warming as long as they burn fuel grown on the surface of the earth. We don't want to return to the climate of 65 million years ago.
I thought after Trump neutered DeSantis that the Gov would stop with his silly grandstanding.
Most U.S. adults continue to support expanding solar panel farms (84%) and wind turbine farms (77%), but Republicans and Democrats are increasingly divided in views on these two energy sources, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey.
Where do you go in a windmill?That is A LOT more oil than oil used in engines.
IMO, it should all come down to carbon footprint, cradle to grave.Where do you go in a windmill?
What I'm getting to is this:
Why are you comparing windmills to engines?
Isn't the comparison other methods of producing electricity for the grid?
And even if there was a comparison somewhere that is valid, don't you also have to take into account the relative amounts of oil used for production of a similar amount of energy or work done?
The comparison you've made doesn't make sense to me.
I feel like the discussion is probably more appropriate for the climate change thread, but if one rejects the premise that CO2 makes any difference in spite of the overwhelming scientific evidence (drink!) to the contrary then one need not worry about such things.IMO, it should all come down to carbon footprint, cradle to grave.
Where does one go in a windmill? Do you mean where is the oil used or what? That question seems very vague to me.Where do you go in a windmill?
What I'm getting to is this:
Why are you comparing windmills to engines?
Isn't the comparison other methods of producing electricity for the grid?
And even if there was a comparison somewhere that is valid, don't you also have to take into account the relative amounts of oil used for production of a similar amount of energy or work done?
The comparison you've made doesn't make sense to me.
The argument of "global warming" or as it is called currently, climate change, has been decried for 50+ years and there really hasn't come true yet. As I said earlier, without warming and cooling there would be no seasons. Nothing the climate protesters have ever stated has really proven to be harmful to the world. I'm sure that you or someone will bring up some study that debunks that statement. However, the U.S. has a very low carbon footprint compared to places like China so why are the climate protesters going to China to demand they change how they do things?I feel like the discussion is probably more appropriate for the climate change thread, but if one rejects the premise that CO2 makes any difference in spite of the overwhelming scientific evidence (drink!) to the contrary then one need not worry about such things.
First, I believe 'climate change' was a term coined by the right (Luntz?). Second, by all measurements, it is real and it is here. The science is indisputable. Third, protesting in China would not go too well!The argument of "global warming" or as it is called currently, climate change, has been decried for 50+ years and there really hasn't come true yet. As I said earlier, without warming and cooling there would be no seasons. Nothing the climate protesters have ever stated has really proven to be harmful to the world. I'm sure that you or someone will bring up some study that debunks that statement. However, the U.S. has a very low carbon footprint compared to places like China so why are the climate protesters going to China to demand they change how they do things?
It's not really grandstanding - Florida has long ranked among the freest states in the union.I thought after Trump neutered DeSantis that the Gov would stop with his silly grandstanding.