Well, if they ever figure out a way to light up Indianapolis ( far from the largest city in the U.S. without using ever square foot of the continental United States for solar power, I'd go for it. Oh, and if you do want to use that much space for one city...well, I hope seeing the sun isn't something you enjoy. Oh, and food. No sunlight because it's all going to solar means no green things growing, no cattle being fed, and then people dying. Oh, wait, that would be a good thing. Maybe clean up the shallow end of the gene pool for once.
Gail Said :
Nice!
dave Said :
Greenpeace can suck it....they're a bunch of idealistic wanabees that want to put the entire planet under/into their way of doing/thinking/believing. I'm all for clean water, air, etc..... but NOT at the expense of progress, reality, common sense, logic, etc.... and NOT at the peril of a bug, a bird, or whatever....... they'll move on. It's been proven....... so GREENPEACE, get off your highhorse and chill. dave
Nick Said :
A "huge solar energy spill is" called a solar flare, the last big one was in 1859, it caused telegraph system fires...! Imagine our current electrical grid and communication système, it will cause global caos!
Greenpeace is now a political organisation that is not based on fact and logic anymore.
Ian Random Said :
I hate this anti-petro garbage. Look, it is a necessary crutch while people figure out something better as happened with whale oil and kerosene. I'd rather see contests for non-petro energy sources, than all the subsidies and feed-in tariffs. After a lifetime of looking at the crap being researched, only now is the stuff getting interesting. Hell, if you live in the boondocks, it is actually cost effective to have solar and propane based appliances. And someday it maybe for a suburbanite.
Mark Said :
Greenpeace sucks and is simply wallowing in its own moronic diatribe.
RealityCheck Said :
Actually, when there's a huge solar energy spill it's called a solar flare...
RealRealityCheck Said :
Wrong! A solar energy spill is not called a solar flare. Do some research.
Well, if they ever figure out a way to light up Indianapolis ( far from the largest city in the U.S. without using ever square foot of the continental United States for solar power, I'd go for it. Oh, and if you do want to use that much space for one city...well, I hope seeing the sun isn't something you enjoy. Oh, and food. No sunlight because it's all going to solar means no green things growing, no cattle being fed, and then people dying. Oh, wait, that would be a good thing. Maybe clean up the shallow end of the gene pool for once.
Nice!
Greenpeace can suck it....they're a bunch of idealistic wanabees that want to put the entire planet under/into their way of doing/thinking/believing. I'm all for clean water, air, etc..... but NOT at the expense of progress, reality, common sense, logic, etc.... and NOT at the peril of a bug, a bird, or whatever....... they'll move on. It's been proven....... so GREENPEACE, get off your highhorse and chill. dave
A "huge solar energy spill is" called a solar flare, the last big one was in 1859, it caused telegraph system fires...! Imagine our current electrical grid and communication système, it will cause global caos!
Greenpeace is now a political organisation that is not based on fact and logic anymore.
I hate this anti-petro garbage. Look, it is a necessary crutch while people figure out something better as happened with whale oil and kerosene. I'd rather see contests for non-petro energy sources, than all the subsidies and feed-in tariffs. After a lifetime of looking at the crap being researched, only now is the stuff getting interesting. Hell, if you live in the boondocks, it is actually cost effective to have solar and propane based appliances. And someday it maybe for a suburbanite.
Greenpeace sucks and is simply wallowing in its own moronic diatribe.
Actually, when there's a huge solar energy spill it's called a solar flare...
Wrong! A solar energy spill is not called a solar flare. Do some research.