Wednesday, January 30, 2008

If the anti-wind farm groups want to win their arguments and stop wind farms, they’re going to have to:

1. prove that they have a better argument than the NYMBY (Not in my back yard) argument and that they are willing to step up to the plate to help curb Global Warming

2. prove, given that Global Warming is the defining moral and sustainable imperative of this century, that they understand Global Warming and even care about the consequences (remember, at the level of public consensus, scientist and citizens around the world have decided that there is enough evidence that the planet is warming up and is doing so from man’s activity, and at the level of scientific inquiry (where if we wait for that kind of exactitude) we will be long past the point where we can curb Global Warming.)

3. prove that oil and gas giants are not subsidizedby the government and that there is are big paybacks for renewable energy

4. stop insulting the intelligence of those who they disagree with

5. prove that the alternatives to renewable energy (gas, oil, coal, biofuels, nuclear, and hydroelectric) will not continue to harm our environment and make it a sustainable one

6. prove that the possible negatives of wind farms (well water, destruction of birds & bats, visual impact on land, light pollution, noise, TV interference, flicker effect, roads (during construction) disruptions, etc. ) offset the proven bad effects of our present energy system against the potential positive benefits in solving Global Warming.

1 comment:

SARTRE said...

Review the replies to the Sam Hopkins Wind Debate on the CWW - Interactive Community Forum.

Environmental Thoughts readers are invited to join the CWW - IC site.

James Hall