I see that the climate change dictators have yet another protest under way.

Question

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7538956.stm

What do you think more unsightly wind generators or a compact coal station?

How many really belive that CO2, which is heavier than air, can be a greenhouse gass?

The climate change science is rather like Alchamy just an excuse for politicians and some scientists to rip off the tax payes and homeowner.

Answer 1

Look dictators have nothing on the greens.  They are for population control by the government and a whole host of dangerous and wacky c**p.

Answer 2

Well my way of looking at it is coal puts money in the pockets of the oil companies. Wind, solar and nuclear do not. Switching to nuclear with hydro for our main electrical generation is the smart way to go for now. Wind, geo thermal solar and others can supplement them providing the power to switch from gasoline to another form or power for transportation. Then we need to consider building orbital solar stations for the long term.

Just remember that the energy crisis of today was planned, organized and put in motion 30 years ago with several presidential decrees paid for up front by the oil companies.

Answer 3

just depends were you site them

i was a coal miner until the strike when the conservatives closed the pits the reason for this was because they owned shell and the shipping to import coal

wind turbines should be used in conjunction with coal we should reopen the pits so the younger generation have jobs

and we can stop importing coal we have always been selfsuficint until the fat cats started robin us

we are just starting to see the amounts they get for there second homes and they keep giveing themselfs massive pay rises then tell the woring person to take pay cuts

they all c**p in the same pot and its us that pay

Answer 4

I think the analogy with alchamy is quite good.

Much depends on the ingredients used as to the result of the spell cast.

Coal powered power stations are also closet incinerators. Easier to gain planning permission for coal than rubbish in the first instance and easy to change use due to necessity later.

Wind power is a supplement source. If you are talking about weather pattern changes it is about as reliable as a sun dial in an eclipse. "Sorry you can't boil your kettle for the next three days as we need all the reserve energy for street lighting and it is too windy to make any more at the moment."

CO2 = 1 atom of carbon binding 2 atoms of oxygen, thus depleting atmosphere and lowering the ozone layer, (it's a greenhouse gas).

Hydro power? How soon people forget hosepipe bans and though the motion of the ocean is pretty reliable the scale and reliability of technology makes it unrealistic as a lynch pin power source.

Nuclear power is widely seen as the saviour and if you are going to invest in nuclear why waste money on alternative sources. Not much point in a nuclear power station running at half capacity because the wind is favourable.

Solar power? There might be some potential in converting deserts into sun harvesters, but it's not going to make an impact on Britain in winter.

Politicians know  nothing more than Joe Bloggs in the street, their informed judgement is formed by advisors/scientists and they are working within the constraints of what we the tax payer provide. So it is a witches cauldron.

Answer 5

A compact coal station is more unsightly and if it wasn't for someone borrowing my tent to go to the Blue Rock festival I would be there too in Kent.  Protestors are happy people in your face, I laugh at your ignorance of the facts.

Answer 6

For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales!

But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior.

With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems.

National sovereignty? Democracy?

Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before.

Answer 7

Wind generators area blot on the land scape. This new high tec power station will produce less CO2 than oil and we have billions of tons of coal its the way forward to less pollution UN like oil and nuclear.

Answer 8

There is no question that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Thats not the issue. The issue is whether the CO2 from fossil fuels will cause bad things , good things, or not affect much at all.

I believe there are many simple though unconventional solutions to greenhouse gases and global warming.. First and foremost is that the true believers should stop driving cars, heating and cooling their houses, stop flying their jets and using their boats, stop heating their water, and become vegetarians. If they all did this it really would make a difference. Why don't they JUST DO IT?

Second, we coiuld blow up a volcano periodically. This is proven to cause cooling plus by doing it in a planned way we can save lives by preparing in advance.

Thirdly, we know that methane is a very bad greenhouse gas. We should start feeding cows BEANO immediately.

Answer 9

A "compact coal station"?  Aren't you forgetting something?  Like the mountains that have to be excavated to get the coal, the trains used to transport it, and the smoke billowing out of them? And even ignoring Global Warming, then there's the known health effects of those living nearby plants and the workers in the mines.

I'd say coal power is much more unsightly than wind. In fact, I'd prefer anything over more coal (including: nuclear, hydro, wind, tidal, solar, geothermal, natural gas, etc.).