“What we are seeing in my county right now is that developers are coming in and asking for 50 acres to put up a solar [or] wind farm…. If the developers got their way in all my surrounding townships, we would have 12,000 acres of solar on some of the best farmland in the United States. It’s monstrous.”
It is still possible to get two sides of the story regarding renewable energy. You just need to read the bottom half first. And correct a few things.
I was reminded of this when reading a pro-renewable piece by Stacy Gittleman, “The Role of Wind and Solar in the Future of Power” (August 24, 2021), the cover story of Downtown Newsmagazine.
Backdoor is better than nothing to shake up the puff narrative.…
“Hey assholes. We’ve been telling you for decades that this was going to happen if we didn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions. You didn’t listen and now it’s all happening. We hope you’re happy. Enjoy the heatwaves, intense rainfall, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and many other things, you fucking morons.” (below)
It was supposed to be a funny. But really, it is a candid commentary of an agenda-driven, frustrated climate scientist/activist at a world that is (correctly) demoting rigid alarmism for realism.
Professor Andrew Dessler is the smartest guy in the climate room. He is, by his own account, hot headed. He says rude things about even the most polite of his scientific adversaries, not unlike his infamous cohort, Michael Mann. Dessler’s predictions are exaggerated, even falsified (here’s one on Texas weather from a decade ago).…
“The nuclear industry’s disastrous history of cost and time overruns show very clearly that what they offer would be too little, too expensive and far too late. With renewables and energy efficiency cheaper and quicker to build and run than nuclear, they have already lost this argument and should have no place to spout their lies at COP26.”
– Richard Dixon, Friends of the Earth Scotland (below)
“The nuclear industry provides most of the world’s CO2-free power, but is barred from UN IPCC meetings and even barred from the adjacent exhibit hall. Clearly UN IPCC does not pursue the public interest. What is the ‘power structure’ of IPCC? Who says ‘no’ a priori? How are these people appointed? How paid? How reimbursed? What’s the org chart?”
– Robert Hargraves, nuclear advocate (below)
It’s an agenda, Mr.…