(01-21-2017 01:36 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I can't tell what you're point is, OO. Is it that just because these renewables can have adverse side-effects that we shouldn't develop them? Or that they aren't this miracle panacea to our energy needs and you feel the need to point that out?

The tactic you're using, whether intentional or unintentional, is what a lot of those who favor fossil fuels over renewables do, which is to point out the speck in the eye of renewables, while fossil fuels have a giant stick in theirs. The speck shouldn't stop us from pushing forward and trying to develop newer and better energy technologies.

Basically, what I want to point out that they are not the miracle panacea so many act like they are. No free and unlimited enrgy, with no consequences or only good consequences on the environment. They have consequences, environmental and political, and costs that are different but just as real as the costs we have now in other forms of energy.

Way too many people think all we need to do is replace coal with solar, oil with wind, and the world will be so much better. Not saying anybody here here is like that, but I have heard that or similar thoughts on other boards within just the last few days.

The First Bundy confrontation was effectively triggered by the government protecting the habitat of the desert tortoise. What will be the fallout when the desert tortoise no longer can find food because the desert is shaded by solar collectors? One mistake is is in thinking the desert is empty and useless. Believe me, there will be those who will protect habitat from encroachment even by solar collectors. And there are hundreds of species of plants, animal, and even fish that will be affected, and thousands that will be affected indirectly.

when I say, no free lunch, I mean there is no easy and obvious solution that makes everybody happy. I see this as more than a speck, I see it as a buried log. A sequoia sized log.

Every solution involves change - a drop in sunlight, a drop in ambient temperature, whatever. When we reach the point, maybe a half century hence,maybe a century, it will no longer be oil and gas ad coal that are the villains. It will be that solar collectors are killing wildlife and changing the ecology, the food chain, as well as the economy, and there will be pro and anti factions, like now. You think polar bears dying off is bad press? Hang around 50 years and see what happens.

I have no solutions. All I can do is point out there are no perfect solutions, and the problems are not specks that can be discussed away, but real world problems that will divide us. There are consequences, both unintended and unforeseen. Careful where you step.

The easiest way to do that is to point out there is no free lunch.