View Full Version : The innocent Victims of the Fossil fuel Industry.
Anyone who isn't trying to cut down their carbonfootprint or driving needs has blood on their hands right now. And some folks have the cheek to overstate the potential damage to birds due to windfarms. Sad, sad, sad...:(
http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/5479/Pentland_Firth_oil_spill_affects_hundreds_of_birds .html
Sad indeed. :(
Also see:
http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?t=58634
That is a shame for the birds...my biggest worry is that oil is too valuable to burn. Even if we stop using fossil fuels for fuel we have not found alternatives for the other uses.
Anyone who isn't trying to cut down their carbonfootprint or driving needs has blood on their hands right now.
Eh? So you know the final destination of the oil product?
The cause of the spillage is being investigated with the rogue actions of an oil tanker passing through the firth among the most favoured theory.
Surely the Captain and crew of the tanker involved are the ones "with blood on their hands"......[disgust]
Anyone who isn't trying to cut down their carbonfootprint or driving needs has blood on their hands right now. And some folks have the cheek to overstate the potential damage to birds due to windfarms. Sad, sad, sad...:(
If you are thinking along those lines then you had better not use any Soap to wash your hands, or any form of plastic, kick a football, use your remote control for your TV or even your TV, Play a CD or watch a DVD, or wear anything with Nylon, the list just goes on and on as all thiese are made from OIL.
It is NOT just motorists who use oil, we all do in one form or another. Even some some shoes are made from oil so walking can be just as bad as driving.
Oh Yes one more thing, what about the Keyboard you are typing on, guess what, that will be made from Oil too !!!!
If you are thinking along those lines then you had better not use any Soap to wash your hands, or any form of plastic, kick a football, use your remote control for your TV or even your TV, Play a CD or watch a DVD, or wear anything with Nylon, the list just goes on and on as all thiese are made from OIL.
It is NOT just motorists who use oil, we all do in one form or another. Even some some shoes are made from oil so walking can be just as bad as driving.
Oh Yes one more thing, what about the Keyboard you are typing on, guess what, that will be made from Oil too !!!!
90% of all oil is used as fuel to burn. If we seek alternative fuel sources, do you think a significant reduction in bird deaths is a worthwhile exercise???
Eh? So you know the final destination of the oil product?
It is irrelevent, the Pentland firth is a busy thoroughfare, 'accidents' happen, it is a fact of life, they are the consequences that we have to live with on a local level. Oh and what about the spills from the oil platform this year alone that killed lots of birds??? C'mon MP use your noggin!
Surely the Captain and crew of the tanker involved are the ones "with blood on their hands"......[disgust]
Kill the trade, stop the deaths. I have no gripe with people doing their job if their are no other jobs available, that is a very basic economic principle. Like in the fur trade, kill the fashion and stop the blood shed.
It is reprehensible that someone of intelligence should decide to defend our actions.
Melancholy Man
08-Oct-08, 23:47
Does anyone else remember the Cormorant Dunking episode of Drop the Dead Donkey?
I know I'm digressing a bit but Wind Farms have things to answer for too.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7581990.stm
Melancholy Man
09-Oct-08, 00:41
You are David Bellamy, Lizz, and I claim my five pounds!
I know I'm digressing a bit but Wind Farms have things to answer for too.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7581990.stm
That is interesting but do you think that the researchers words of that report of 'normally we would expect to have one bat death per year' should have no significance??
just check out the Org's main page.
http://www.caithness.org/
You are David Bellamy, Lizz, and I claim my five pounds!
Nah, David Ballamy had to face up to facts as a scientist and retracted all his anti windfarmerism on the grounds that the evidence for climate change was irrefutable then he refused to go public again. Just like all the other skeptics, they haven't produced one upstanding peer reviewed document between them despite all their waffling. Gawwd, this pro renewable energy stance just gets easier and easier...[lol]
If it were proved that Global warming by mankind was debunked by good scientific methods then I am a believer folks!!!
Until then....
oldmarine
09-Oct-08, 05:26
Me thinks that most of the world will have to find alternative sources for fosil fuels for energy in the near future, Too many problems associated with the way it is going now.
It is irrelevant...
Until you can show me that you are using some miracle of modern technology to power your computer I'll just assume that you are as guilty as the rest of us...
Until you can show me that you are using some miracle of modern technology to power your computer I'll just assume that you are as guilty as the rest of us...
Can you show me that oil is used to power my pc? That said, yes I am guilty, I am not denying it. But he difference is that I want to reform my bad ways and be given the way to do it.
As has already been pointed out - "oil" helped build your PC!!
And where was your concern when the Exxon Valdez, the Torrey Canyon, Erika, Braer, etc all happened? Did it suddenly stop you from using products of the petrochemical industry? No I bet it didn't.
If you are so concerned about this event why not get down to the place they are cleaning the birds and volunteer your time, of which it appears you have plenty of, to actually do something rather than bleating about how we, of whom you have no true idea about how green we are or try to be, are as guilty of this disaster as the person who actually dumped the oil overboard.......
As has already been pointed out - "oil" helped build your PC!!
And where was your concern when the Exxon Valdez, the Torrey Canyon, Erika, Braer, etc all happened? Did it suddenly stop you from using products of the petrochemical industry? No I bet it didn't.
If you are so concerned about this event why not get down to the place they are cleaning the birds and volunteer your time, of which it appears you have plenty of, to actually do something rather than bleating about how we, of whom you have no true idea about how green we are or try to be, are as guilty of this disaster as the person who actually dumped the oil overboard.......
You are beginning to sound as if you are looking for someone to blame for your own reluctance to support renewable energy in order to ease your own concience. So I will only take that sort of broadside from someone who has given up using all oil products since Exxon Valdez thank you very much.;)
Ahh, you fail to realise that I have openly stated in the past that I support renewable energy. I am just opposed to it being used to despoil an area of the UK that I happen to feel very strongly about.
I have said that I would prefer to see small individual turbines. You ignored my PM on the subject. I asked you a serious question but you obviously felt discussing it not worth your time. Yet you rant on about how blood is dripping all over our keyboards?!!......
I also support wave energy, hydro electric, solar etc etc.
I am currently investigating the installation of a wind turbine on my property hopefully with the full consent of my neighbours. I am not arrogant enough to not take into consideration their concerns of noise, flicker, eyesore...
We use low energy light bulbs throughout the house. We drive fuel efficient cars. We use carbon offsetting to reduce my carbon footprint when we fly. We recycle everything and have done way before it was thrust on the general public.
I was instrumental in introducing recycling at my old work place. Drinks/food cans, plastic bottles and paper were all recycled years ago. The knock on effect was that even though I had strong opposition initially from some colleagues I converted most to the habit of recycling long before they had to do it.
So, you don't really know me and I don't have to ease my conscience as I believe I am doing my bit. I could be greener but as I live in the countryside I need a car. It must be wonderful to live in a city fully served with reliable and regular public transport. If I did then I would be 1000's of pounds better off...
So I will only take that sort of broadside from someone who has given up using all oil products since Exxon Valdez thank you very much
Likewise, I fail to see how you can launch such broadsides about this latest event while you are as guilty, maybe even more guilty than me, of being behind this crime.
We use low energy light bulbs throughout the house.
More double talk? Not taking in your own posts?;)
http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=244405&postcount=112
Melancholy Man
09-Oct-08, 11:54
Rheghead, are you a Green?
You are beginning to sound as if you are looking for someone to blame for your own reluctance to support renewable energy in order to ease your own concience. So I will only take that sort of broadside from someone who has given up using all oil products since Exxon Valdez thank you very much.
That doesn't follow. Mad Pict is not pulling the I Care card over Exxon Valdez; he's clearly able to rationalize it. He was accusing you of double-standards in not caring about it.
Both his and your arguments have problems.
Rheghead, are you a Green?
I can't be green, our system doesn't allow me to be.
Melancholy Man
09-Oct-08, 12:00
I can't be green, our system doesn't allow me to be.
Never mistake a Green for an environmentalist.
Never mistake a Green for an environmentalist.
Never mistake an anti windfarm campaigner for someone who has the best interests of the planet at heart.
Melancholy Man
09-Oct-08, 12:05
More a priori assumptions. The one about Greens is true, though.
That was meant in humour...
Yes we use LE bulbs. Our fridge freezer is energy rated A. Our washing machine is A. We only use the tumble dryer when we have to. But I made these decisions on my own - I see the benefits of using less energy to reduce my bills.
I see your opinion as unworthy of any further brain process
OK - as you seem to view my opinion on the subject as such, I think I will withdraw from discussing any further on the topic of renewable energy.
I reserve the right to revoke this withdrawal at anytime so referring back to this post to try and gain advantage is pointless...
Rheghead is right, all hail the mighty Rheghead for he is to be believed. Save the planet, save the cheerleader......
That was meant in humour...[...]OK - as you seem to view my opinion on the subject as such.
That was meant in humour as well.;)
btw I didn't ignore your pm, I just didn't have an answer except to say that I think small scale wind generation doesn't provide enough power in urban areas and investment is better placed with large scale wind. Large scale wind in good areas of wind will be better in terms of visual amenity than smaller developments in poorer areas.
90% of all oil is used as fuel to burn. If we seek alternative fuel sources, do you think a significant reduction in bird deaths is a worthwhile exercise???
One barrel of crude oil 44 Gallons, when refined, produces about 20 gallons of finished petrol, and 7 gallons of diesel, as well as other petroleum products. Most of the petroleum products are used to produce energy. Other products made from petroleum include: ink, crayons, bubble gum, dishwashing liquids, deodorant, eyeglasses, records, tyres, ammonia, and heart valves.
Just for information only 2 percent of all oil in the sea comes from ship or barge spills, more oil actually gets into water from natural oil seeps coming from the ocean floor. 63% of all Crude Oil in the sea comes from natural Seepage.
33% from leaks that happen when we use petroleum products on land. For example, petrol that sometimes drips onto the ground when people are filling their tanks, motor oil that gets thrown away after an oil change, or fuel that escapes from a leaky storage tank. When it rains, the spilled products get washed into the gutter and eventually go to rivers and the ocean. Another way that oil sometimes gets into water is when fuel is leaked from motorboats and jet skis.
http://i33.tinypic.com/11ljtll.gif
So although when Oil is spilt from a Ship or Tanker it does have an effect on the Environment and Wildlife it really is only a small % of the problem. The worst problem is one that no one can do anything about, natural seepage from the ocean floor.
So although when Oil is spilt from a Ship or Tanker it does have an effect on the Environment and Wildlife it really is only a small % of the problem. The worst problem is one that no one can do anything about, natural seepage from the ocean floor.
The cynical answer to that then is that anthropologically derived radiation accounts for just 0.3% of the total in the environment. The rest comes from rocks food etc etc. Because we can't do anything about the natural stuff is a reason why the environment, workers in the nuclear industry and the public should not be afforded radiation protection.
Fuel oils don't have a big impact on birds if they spill but crude oil does, from your own post, 37% of all oil in the sea isn't from a natural source. Hardly insignificant.
Your point doesn't add up to me.
90% of all oil is used as fuel to burn. If we seek alternative fuel sources, do you think a significant reduction in bird deaths is a worthwhile exercise???
If we stop using oil as fuel then prices of almost everything we buy will go up. It wouldn't be worthwhile extracting oil if only 10% of it is going to be used to make plastics etc. Look around you home-I'd bet there is something oil related in every room. What will be used instead to make all those products?
If we stop using oil as fuel then prices of almost everything we buy will go up. It wouldn't be worthwhile extracting oil if only 10% of it is going to be used to make plastics etc. Look around you home-I'd bet there is something oil related in every room. What will be used instead to make all those products?
If we keep burning oil at the rate we are then everything is going to up anyway. Past experience should tell you that being an avid motorist.
About 4% of all oil is used as the raw material for plastic, another 4% is used by the industry as fuel to convert the other 4%. The plastics industry should a prime candidate for a renewable revolution.
We could cut problems associated with oil production by having refineries closer to points of source. With all that renewable solar energy in the middle east would make great in roads into cutting emissions from the oil industry and reduce crude oil transportation. And local jobs will be created thus relieving tensions between nations.
And local jobs will be created thus relieving tensions between nations.
Sounds a bit like a quote from a holy book. ;):lol:
Melancholy Man
09-Oct-08, 17:18
Sounds a bit like a quote from a holy book. ;):lol:
The Book of Dave, most likely.
Sounds a bit like a quote from a holy book. ;):lol:
Due to solar energy's very nature of being spread out evenly over the planet, renewable energy proliferation is one of the paths to world peace that is readily available to us, any economy that is based on dwindling finite resources from only a few selected countries will be doomed for failure.
Anyone who isn't trying to cut down their carbonfootprint or driving needs has blood on their hands right now. And some folks have the cheek to overstate the potential damage to birds due to windfarms. Sad, sad, sad...:(
http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/5479/Pentland_Firth_oil_spill_affects_hundreds_of_birds .html
Blood on my hands? I've got it up to my elbows and will, no doubt, eventually succeed in getting it up to my armpits. If I don't, it won't be for the want of trying.
Birds are only dinosaur decedents living on borrowed time after missing the last mass extinction.
Due to solar energy's very nature of being spread out evenly over the planet, renewable energy proliferation is one of the paths to world peace that is readily available to us, any economy that is based on dwindling finite resources from only a few selected countries will be doomed for failure.
That's all very well but without intent from individuals were doomed anyway. You guys canna even agree about a few (hundred) windmills.:roll:
You guys canna even agree about a few (hundred) windmills.:roll:
On the contrary, I agree that wind turbines are unsightly, especially if sited close to housing or in places of outstanding beauty. I never get any acknowledgement or agreement on the beneficial technical attributes of turbines because the others are so obsessed with the visual amenity issue to the exclusion of everything else so much so their judgement is clouded.
On the contrary, I agree that wind turbines are unsightly, especially if sited close to housing or in places of outstanding beauty. I never get any acknowledgement or agreement on the beneficial technical attributes of turbines because the others are so obsessed with the visual amenity issue to the exclusion of everything else so much so their judgement is clouded.
I'm fairly nuetral about windmills. I quite like them in the distance. I think your wrong about everyone who is against windmills not having the technical evidence to support their idea that windmills cost more than they provide. I agree though that visual amenity is a big issue for most people.
OK - as you seem to view my opinion on the subject as such, I think I will withdraw from discussing any further on the topic of renewable energy.
I reserve the right to revoke this withdrawal at anytime so referring back to this post to try and gain advantage is pointless...
Rheghead is right, all hail the mighty Rheghead for he is to be believed. Save the planet, save the cheerleader......
Hey Madpict don't be giving up on posting about renewable energy, please.
Rheghead just doesn't understand how important it is to some of us to protect the magnificent county of Caithness. He doesn't understand the beauty - it's not scientific, it can't be calculated nor has somebody from somewhere labelled Caithness as an area of outstanding beauty.
He thinks appreciation of the landscape is a single visual issue but of course it's so much more - all the senses are involved in the experience.
The proof of this is in Rhegheads last post, I quote 'I agree that wind turbines are unsightly, especially if sited close to housing or in places of outstanding beauty'. You see, he doesn't get it at all. Why on earth should a turbine be unsightly when sited close to dense housing and not unsightly located in sparcely populated areas.
In my eyes Caithness is an area of outstanding beauty.
I believe that remote areas such as Caithness should be looking more toward small scale and micro renewables, combined heat and power schemes and energy efficiency. Wave, offshore wind and tidal will be our national contribution to electricity generation.
Ploughing up our county for onshore wind should be the very, very last resort should all else fail.
Why on earth should a turbine be unsightly when sited close to dense housing and not unsightly located in sparcely populated areas.
Eh?? I didn't say that at all. I said they look unsightly in areas of outstanding beauty as well. I consider the vast majority of Caithness to be that. Are you reading what you want to read again?
Wind turbines aren't the destroyers of landscape beauty, they are the guardians of it.
I agree that using oil is a very bad thing and we are probably already doomed (the runaway greenhouse effect has already kicked in and we may already be too late to stop it - closing the door after the horse has bolted so to speak). And the sad fact is that if we cut back on our oil consumption, someone else (such as American and Japanese big-car fans) will burn it up for us and our efforts wont make the blindest bit of difference on the grand scale of things.
And windmills aint gonna solve our problem - anyone believing that is living in cuckoo-land and should check out how much carbon is released during the manufacture/installation of these beasts relative to the amount of energy generated in their life-times.
And windmills aint gonna solve our problem - anyone believing that is living in cuckoo-land and should check out how much carbon is released during the manufacture/installation of these beasts relative to the amount of energy generated in their life-times.
Can you tell me how much carbon is released during their manufacture and installation? And then can you tell me how much energy they produce or carbon they will mitigate so I can make up my mind?
I read a report to Scottish ministers from the Renewable Energy Foundation which has good info on it, but the report is slightly flawed without any justification. However, the report does (the report is site specific for a windfarm on peatland) say that the payback time is 3.5 years over a 25 year life of the turbines, can you prove otherwise that wind turbines do not recoup their energies of manufacture/installation etc?
I want a good sources of info, not just waffle from bogus websites mind.
This is a quote from the Country Guardian, an anti windfarm website, the Case against windfarms, the words of the supreme anti-windfarm campaigner himself, Dr J. R. Etherington
Myths of our own making
Failure to payback energy and CO2. It is often said that wind turbines fail to pay back the energy and CO2 cost of their manufacture and erection, or even that the CO2 emission from cement manufacture alone is enough to offset the lifetime saving of CO2 by a turbine. All of these assertions are untrue. Don't repeat them - there is enough to complain about in wind power without resorting to easily
exposed misinformation but for more detail see Roads (below) and Payback time for energy and CO2 (section 5).
I'm really counting on you to change my mind on this, you will serve the anti windfarm brigade a great service if you satisfy my critical curiosity.
I am prepared to join CWIF and be their most dedicated and outspoken activist if you come up with all the goods.
Thank you :);)
Eh?? I didn't say that at all. I said they look unsightly in areas of outstanding beauty as well. I consider the vast majority of Caithness to be that. Are you reading what you want to read again?
You said - 'wind turbines are unsightly, especially if sited close to housing or in places of outstanding beauty'.
That translates to me as - wind turbines are more unsightly if sited close to housing or in places of outstanding beauty. It therefore follows that you consider wind turbines to be less unsightly if sited anywhere else.
Weird or what!
In my view they look exactly the same where ever they happen to be sited. If they could be erected without digging up and destroying huge swathes of countryside (for both the windfarms and the transmission lines) then they might be more acceptable. The inefficiency of them dictates that many are required to generate very little so a great deal of destruction has to take place.
As I said large scale commercial onshore wind should be a last resort. Had that been the case the wet renewables would have been under serious development long ago. A cap on commercial onshore wind and the power companies/developers would be forced to invest in other renewable technologies. They'd have had no choice.
Wind turbines aren't the destroyers of landscape beauty, they are the guardians of it.
Oh please - that last remark - too, too much, even for you. Gave me a laugh though.
Oh please - that last remark - too, too much, even for you. Gave me a laugh though.
LOL, it isn't my quote but I thought that it would give you all a chuckle.:p
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.