Interesting article in Toronto Sun today Climate Change : 5 myths that will be completely dismissed by the left wing whack a do crowd that blindly support all forms of climate change theory. Which is a shame as if they would just apply the same level requiring evidence and proof to climate change theories, as they do to rest of their lives, we might actually build bridges and move forward on real productive change and policies.
I will however take exception to numbers 2 and 3 in the list.
Myth 2: Wind and solar power are effective in lowering emissions.
Regarding solar and wind energy. There is a few real problems that surround solar and wind energy as a viable alternative that the left wingers refuse to accept as fact, despite the mounds and mounds and mounds of evidence (some by their very own scientists and "experts").
Solar and wind are positive concepts and ideals but the biggest hurdle facing them at this moment is COST. They are just not cost effective at this point in time. That's the simple truth. We all love pictures of some multi-millionaire going to the extreme in alternative energy. Visually it looks awesome and with out fail you will see someone put the worst picture of the Oil Sands against a field of solar panels and say "This (solar) is better then this (oil field).
What they NEVER seem to grasp is that (oil field that never looks as bad as what left wingers try to make it look) supplies power to millions and millions and millions.
Where as that huge arse area of solar panels supplies power for 100s (not a typo) and costs more to maintain then the oil field at this time in history.
Wind is much the same problem cost effectiveness wise, as it currently stands.
And none of that bothers to address the MASSIVE NEGATIVE Impact Wind and Solar have on the environment as well. Not carbon but WILDLIFE. Wind Turbines kill more birds in a single season then a massive oil spill ever will. Yet we rarely hear about that VERY REAL DISASTER coming from them. And Wind Turbines also have the added benefit of disrupting mating and territorial marking driving wildlife away from their constant buzz and hum of the turbines. Animals that were born in a turbine region are often born deft and die shortly after. Wind Turbines have a HUGE negative impact on wildlife that the left try to hide and cover up when they speak about wind turbines and their effect.
Solar is no better in that regard. What do people really think happens to a bird or animal that gets to close to a solar panel in full operation and heating up? its killed or even worse blinded. If you put them on the water you disrupt fish and water temperature levels massively killing (or driving away) entire regions of fish and underwater life as the panel farm heats up the water in that area.
Solar and wind are lofty goals that should be pursued, tinkered with, adapted to suit our demands and needs. But they are NOT a cure all solution right now. They are PROVEN financially irresponsible and present a whole host of disastrous environmental issues of their own.
I believe solar and wind will one day play a big roll in our energy production but that day is not here now or the foreseeable future. The technology is still in its relatively young form and needs to continued research and improvement. Rushing it only hurts the people, the animals, the environment. Which is ironic as if you listen to the left wing whack a dos about climate change, they claim we need to do solar and wind NOW because of the people, animals, and environment.
But as usually that crowd only looks at a small portion of the entire bigger picture.
Regarding Number 3,
Myth 3: Canada’s oilsands are a major source of emissions.
Oil is dirty and probably does affect the environment is some negative way. One only need look at the REAL pictures (not the crap the activist left wingers try to portray Oil Sands as) to see there is allot of things happening there and you have to be foolish to think that much upheaval will have no lasting effect on the environment
BUT that doesn't change the truth about why we need Oil still.
Its really the same argument as what I wrote above. I think the article did some creative math for part of its article on the oil sands. I think everyone knows Oil (not just Oil sands but drilling, Fraking, all of it) is messy.
But right now its the cheapest form of wide spread fuel / power source we have. And cost + supply size trumps emissions at this point in time.
In time I have no doubt some alternative form of energy will over take Oil and the world very well might be better for it. We will see when that time comes. But for now, financially Oil is the best option. Mass supply is also Oil as the best option.
Alternative energy is simply not ready yet.
Not fully developed yet
Alternative energy simply is not the best solution or best answer at this stage of the game
No comments:
Post a Comment