Biden accomplishments

koobookie wrote:

Rick wrote: And our lands are being covered in solar panels, the skies are filling with giant blades that kill birds by the millions, and then those blades end up being buried in the ground. Oh what a beautiful green world we're building.

Not quite right:

Dr. Loss' research estimates that wind turbines kill 234,000 birds a year. That sure sounds like a lot of birds.

Some bird species like eagles and hawks are more impacted than others. But it turns out, the overall bird numbers are low compared to other man-made things that kill birds. Communication towers kill 6.6 million birds a year. Two hundred million are killed by cars, and building windows kill 600 million.

www.wfaa.com/article/news/verify/verify-...d8-be79-62ed5406e8e6

I’ve worked on and around communication towers pretty much all my adult life and have seen maybe 3 dead birds. Where does this bozo get his numbers?

What kills more birds?
Feral cats, domestic cats, oil pits, poison, vehicles, electrical lines, and cell-phone towers all kill more birds than wind turbines. After cats, buildings with glass windows are the deadliest human-related cause of bird death. Nearly 600 million US birds die colliding into them each year.Oct 23, 2020 FYI

It’s a silly argument. The problem with wind power is that we have no control of wind.

HERE's a thought...daily tide schedules allow a know factor...utilizing the motion of water (twice a day)
with TIDES AS the major component of generating power...I'll try to find the research link. I think it's called
TIDAL POWER generated electricity.

www.eia.gov/energyexplained/hydropower/tidal-power.php

interesting that ALASKA is a potential site

Sure its a great idea, but will never be allowed because it will disrupt too many natural habitats. Hydrogen fuel cells using solar power to produce the hydrogen is another great idea, but people are terrified of Hydrogen because it is a little bit explosive. Any of these technologies are fine, but simly can't replace fossil fuel overnight. The hit to our ecomony over the Biden decrees will be staggering. And you guys thought the Covid death toll was bad....

Pony Soldier wrote: Sure its a great idea, but will never be allowed because it will disrupt too many natural habitats. Hydrogen fuel cells using solar power to produce the hydrogen is another great idea, but people are terrified of Hydrogen because it is a little bit explosive. Any of these technologies are fine, but simly can't replace fossil fuel overnight. The hit to our ecomony over the Biden decrees will be staggering. And you guys thought the Covid death toll was bad....

This is what confuses me - I don't think anyone is saying that we have to give up fossil fuels overnight. That's not realistic. Instead, I believe that most are saying we need to move forward toward total renewable energy, or at least a majority.

When conservatives say that our economy will be ruined by green energy, my reaction is "Then get on board the new technology. Let's use American ingenuity to solve this problem rather than staying with an old non-renewable technology."

Green energy development should be the new tech boom. I don't understand the reluctance to embrace renewables.

Nobody is calling for that? Did you miss the usurper’s first week of decrees signing away jobs in the oil and natural gas industries by the tens of thousands?

using old tech is like living in an AMISH community...it has been decades for NEW, INNOVATIVE TEK
to take old.....there is a reason for that...lobbyists and greed within the industry.....$$$$ go to oil, and
lip service is supporting NEW TEK.

Pony Soldier wrote: Nobody is calling for that? Did you miss the usurper’s first week of decrees signing away jobs in the oil and natural gas industries by the tens of thousands?

I assume you're talking about the Keystone pipeline? If so, it's more like 1,000 construction jobs and 50 permanent jobs.

Only about 1,000 of these jobs are currently filled. Also most of these jobs were temporary positions slated to last 4 to 8 months while a pipeline would have been constructed. Those jobs would have been primarily in Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas.

Finally, a State Department report on the Keystone Pipeline found the project would only create 50 permanent long lasting jobs some of which would be in Canada, not the United States.

www.khou.com/article/news/verify/keyston...b4-878e-9fd23f8d6258

Let's put those people to work on green jobs. Let's make that technology a priority and jump start that industry more than it has. What is the resistance to green jobs?

Interesting article on the true cost of fossil fuels and the actual Biden executive order.

It’s the potential for a permanent pivot away from taxpayer subsidies for oil and gas and toward providing incentives for renewable energy that holds the most promise here. Oil and gas are so profitable and wield so much political power precisely because of those subsidies. Shifting incentives toward industries that can support the goal of net-zero emissions is the most powerful tool our government has in achieving that goal. And Biden has a plan for making sure such incentives deliver value for taxpayers, too. He’s including all actions taken in these orders in his new Buy American directive. Not only will products related to these activities need to be produced in America, but all the jobs created as part of this will have to include the choice to join a union.

www.outsideonline.com/2420587/how-bidens...efinitely_wild#close