Don’t worry, just a little bump - $70 is just around the corner. Short traders just keep making those margin calls, mortgage the house if you have to. Fortunes await you! PO is for pansies and doomers. At $70 short some more ..... it is going back to $22 .... the world is awash with oil ........ reality has nothing to do with it, its all in those charts!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:37 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
Revi wrote:
Bush represents the last century. We need to move on.
Bush represents big money and even bigger profit. I don't think we'll rid ourselves of that in the next century. We'll just see another candidate who platforms on some controversial but meaningless topic that they'll never do anything about in order to get in some position of power and shovel the treasury, either directly or indirectly, into the pockets of the "friends" that got them there. _________________
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
TWilliam wrote:
biofuel13 wrote:
What the hell is wrong with us? Why don't we ever reach a breaking point and do SOMETHING?
Watch this little public prank and pay close attention to how the 'victims' respond, and you might begin to get an idea...
Scary. And the people who are moving around will be the ones, if they have the capability, to select the next president and leaders of the United States. Even scarier: who are the actual, real zombies in this video? _________________ THE SIMPLE LIFE: One frozen pond, a few sticks, a little round puck, and a bunch of rowdy kids.
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:06 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&q
Sorry, Environmental Impact Statement requirements (laws) are certainly not going to impede this administration. Even if you aren't a fan of the Bush Admin, you have to give them credit for the ability to work through and around the Federal Bureaucracy to accomplish their goals.
Beyond the obvious example of the Iraq war, another instructive example is the Klamath River fish kill - linked below. When they cared, this bunch was certainly able to make things happen and quickly.
By combining unwavering ideological positions -- such as the priority of economic interests over protected fish -- with a deep practical knowledge of the federal bureaucracy, Cheney has made an indelible mark on the administration's approach to everything from air and water quality to the preservation of national parks and forests.
It was Cheney's insistence on easing air pollution controls, not the personal reasons she cited at the time, that led Christine Todd Whitman to resign as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, she said in an interview that provides the most detailed account so far of her departure.
Also, as mentioned earlier - Presidential leadership certainly could be applied to speed up or work around any delays in approving solar power installations. Especially the reported two year delays. Besides, what is the work load of the approving office? If they're overloaded, couldn't they quickly bring in contractors to get the job done instead of going through the long drawn out process of hiring Government employees. The Bush Admin favors privitization of Government services to improve efficiency and reduce cost (to the taxpayer). How about a signing a contract with someone like SAIC next week to immediately clear out the EIS backlog? Of course, there likely is no backlog and it's just a smokescreen and a final favor to big coal before Bush's term ends. _________________ "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." Homer Simpson
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 5210 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:16 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
joe1347 wrote:
there likely is no backlog and it's just a smokescreen and a final favor to big coal before Bush's term ends.
Why don't you read the article?
The article discusses the fact that there is a backlog of applications for use of federal land for new solar plants. Because of the high oil prices, there are many many new applications to develop wind and solar power.
By federal law, ANY leasing, sale, or development of federal lands requires an EIS to be done.
If you don't think EIS statements need to be done on solar energy sites, then you are wrong. If a solar energy company tries to sneak out and night and start work build a solar power plant on federal land without the EIS being completed and without the approval of federal agencies, they will be stopped, and taken to court and fined and the work will be stopped.
If you don't like EIS laws, then lobby your congressman to change the laws.
Its illogical to blame George Bush for the laws requiring EIS statements to be done. Congress enacted these laws DECADES AGO at the behest of environmentalists who were concerned that valuable natural sites could be damaged and that endangered species could be affected by development of federal lands. It would be nice if US companies could just start building powerplants they way they can in some foreign countries, but the US has much more strict environmental laws...you can't build groovy solar power plants or windfarms or powerlines in the US without an EIS any more then you can drill an evil oil well or build pipelines or mine for coal without an EIS
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 5210 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:29 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
The law requiring EIS statements to be done is 38 years old. Can we please stop the idiotic claims that requirement for EIS statements for solar power plants being planned for sites on federal land are somehow George Bush's fault?
Thank you.
-------------
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a United States environmental law that was signed into law on January 1, 1970 by U.S. President Richard Nixon. The focus of the law was the establishment of a U.S. national policy promoting the enhancement of the environment, but its most significant effect was to establish the requirement for environmental impact statements (EISs) for major U.S. federal government actions.
NEPA came into existence following widespread protests against the federal government's destruction of neighborhoods and the natural environment while building Interstate highways during the 1950s and 1960s. The law has since been applied to any project, federal, state or local, that involves federal funding or work performed by the federal government. Although enacted on January 1, 1970, its "short title" is "National Environmental Policy Act of 1969." It was passed as P.L. 91-190 and is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 4321 through 42 U.S.C. § 4347.
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
Plantagenet wrote:
The law requiring EIS statements to be done is 38 years old. Can we please stop the idiotic claims that requirement for EIS statements for solar power plants being planned for sites on federal land are somehow George Bush's fault?
Thank you.
-------------
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a United States environmental law that was signed into law on January 1, 1970 by U.S. President Richard Nixon. The focus of the law was the establishment of a U.S. national policy promoting the enhancement of the environment, but its most significant effect was to establish the requirement for environmental impact statements (EISs) for major U.S. federal government actions.
NEPA came into existence following widespread protests against the federal government's destruction of neighborhoods and the natural environment while building Interstate highways during the 1950s and 1960s. The law has since been applied to any project, federal, state or local, that involves federal funding or work performed by the federal government. Although enacted on January 1, 1970, its "short title" is "National Environmental Policy Act of 1969." It was passed as P.L. 91-190 and is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 4321 through 42 U.S.C. § 4347.
cheers!
We're not arguing that the law exists. The argument is that the Bush Administration has shown little regard for laws when it suits them. As for the the applications piling up, again the argument is that instead of throwing up their hands and saying - sorry no solar energy for two years - the Bush Admin could show some leadership or managment to fast track approvals. Unless there are scorpion huggers, it's idiotic to think that there is a significant environmental impact associated with solar power plants in the middle of the desert - especially when the alternative is either brown outs (no electricity) or to burn yet more coal which has a multitude of known environmental impacts associated with both it's mining and burning.
_________________ "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." Homer Simpson
Last edited by joe1347 on Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
cephalotus wrote:
ProudFossil wrote:
I gave the links to the raw data in my original post. I don't think PO Forum wants me to post the 27 x 254 matrix of usages.
I culdn't find the fdate for the US there, otherwise I wouldn't have asked...
Code:
But as an example
Raw usage for Antarctica, 1980-2006
RAW data for the US would have been more helpful.
I do not understand what you mean with fdate.
I posted the Antarctica stuff for two reasons, one it demonstrates that even in the most barren, God-forsaken part of the world, usage is increasing at a rapid rate. And I thought it might add a bit of humor to the thread.
Incidentally the data for the US is:
17056 16058 15296 15231 15725.61 15726.42 16280.63 16665.05 17283.31 17325.15 16988.5 16713.84 17032.86 17236.73 17718.16 17724.59 18308.9 18620.3 18917.15 19519.34 19701.08 19648.71 19761.3 20033.5 20731.15 20802.16 20687.42
And I will anticipate those of you who will say, See we told you so. Usage has increased during Bush. But suprisingly it has throughout the whole 25 years. And remember we now have 30,000,000 illegal aliens more now than 25 years ago.
I don't think anyone of the presidents made the people use the gasoline/oil. It was in the cards for the boomers, the Xers, and all the other generational groups since 1980 to demand more.
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
MyOldTDiIsStillGoing wrote:
TWilliam wrote:
Watch this little public prank and pay close attention to how the 'victims' respond, and you might begin to get an idea...
Scary. And the people who are moving around will be the ones, if they have the capability, to select the next president and leaders of the United States. Even scarier: who are the actual, real zombies in this video?
Yep. And did you catch the comment from the guy standing behind the one in line about 'I think we should cut this guy' (meaning cut in front of him in line, not cut him with a knife)? Did you also notice how no one even so much as touched any of the pranksters to see if they'd get a response?
We've really become a nation of mindless voyeurs. As long as it doesn't directly impact us (as in 'ball-bat-upside-the-head' impact), we just watch with mouths agape while making little if any effort to intervene.
I remember a similar experience I had several years back. Myself and a group of friends were in a Kmart, and just for giggles we grabbed a ball from the toy section and started playing 'soccer' throughout the store. We went on for I'd say a good half hour or so, and not one person even acknowledged what we were doing. Not customers, not staff. It was almost as if we were invisible. Very bizarre... _________________ "It means buckle your seatbelt, Dorothy, because Kansas? Is goin' bye-bye... "
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
Plantagenet wrote:
joe1347 wrote:
there likely is no backlog and it's just a smokescreen and a final favor to big coal before Bush's term ends.
Why don't you read the article?
The article discusses the fact that there is a backlog of applications for use of federal land for new solar plants. Because of the high oil prices, there are many many new applications to develop wind and solar power.
By federal law, ANY leasing, sale, or development of federal lands requires an EIS to be done.
If you don't think EIS statements need to be done on solar energy sites, then you are wrong. If a solar energy company tries to sneak out and night and start work build a solar power plant on federal land without the EIS being completed and without the approval of federal agencies, they will be stopped, and taken to court and fined and the work will be stopped.
If you don't like EIS laws, then lobby your congressman to change the laws.
Its illogical to blame George Bush for the laws requiring EIS statements to be done. Congress enacted these laws DECADES AGO at the behest of environmentalists who were concerned that valuable natural sites could be damaged and that endangered species could be affected by development of federal lands. It would be nice if US companies could just start building powerplants they way they can in some foreign countries, but the US has much more strict environmental laws...you can't build groovy solar power plants or windfarms or powerlines in the US without an EIS any more then you can drill an evil oil well or build pipelines or mine for coal without an EIS
Cheers!
BINGO. Read the article joe. The DEPT OF INTERIORS (WHICH IS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION) all the permits done, no backlog. They have to have the EIS to give the 100% go forward permit. IF THIS IS TO BE OVER RULED, congress must create a bill to do it. Get with your congress representative to push it. You obviously have not worked in the corporate world or dealt with the government much. A visit to the DMV would be enough to educate anyone on how they work.
It is obvious that you want to say and do everything 'Hate Bush'...and don't understand the government system our country has.
Plantagenet said it all. The land is federal land, therefore yours and mine. The government can't just bulldoze it down for everything. The solar installation will happen. It will happen at the speed of our government. The article gave the typical sappy NYT twist of these small companies and their dealing with the government isn't happening fast enough. Well, before they signed on with the government, they should of known how the government works. Many business through experience learned the frustration of dealing with them. Some businesses won't even touch a government contract, it just isn't worth it. Sad, but that is the way it is.
FYI: Bush's ranch is almost all solar powered and he had the White House converted to solar power as a primary source when he came. The previous administration didn't. Al Gore's mansion isn't.
Enough said, time to move on. _________________ THE SIMPLE LIFE: One frozen pond, a few sticks, a little round puck, and a bunch of rowdy kids.
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 5210 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
joe1347 wrote:
Plantagenet wrote:
The law requiring EIS statements to be done is 38 years old. Can we please stop the idiotic claims that requirement for EIS statements for solar power plants being planned for sites on federal land are somehow George Bush's fault?
Thank you.
We're not arguing that the law exists..... As for the the applications piling up, again the argument is that instead of throwing up their hands and saying - sorry no solar energy for two years - the Bush Admin could show some leadership or managment to fast track approvals. Unless there are scorpion huggers, it's idiotic to think that there is a significant environmental impact associated with solar power plants in the middle of the desert
You can't "fast-track" the EIS process. The law is written to require specific investigations of water, land, threatened animals, etc. Its a law environmentalists got passed to SLOW DOWN development. Some EIS processes can take decades, especially if they go to court. Typically the field investigations and the writing of the EIS can be contracted out to private companies.
But the BLM, by law, can't contract out the oversight and the review of the EIS statements----its the BLM's job to manage federal lands and to review EIS statements and construction proposals. Thats what they do.
If any of the EIS investigations or the EIS written report doesn't adequately address the environmental issues, then environmental groups can appeal and have it all done over. Even then, the BLM and the power companies and the constructions can all be sued by environmental groups if they dispute any part of the EIS.
Environmentalists have gotten to be very good at delaying and shutting down construction projects. Building just about anything in the US takes a long time, or may never happen, when environmental groups object.
Its idiotic to imagine that there are no environmental issues or endangered species in the desert. There are plenty of endangered species in the desert, starting with turtles. Then you've got your frogs and salamanders.....virtually all amphibians are endangered these days....any muddy ponds with frogs within a couple of miles of the construction sites? Any bats? Coyotes? Squirrels? Hawks? Eagles? Ground water? Contamination during construction? Road buidling? That generates sediment that hurts fish and frogs.
The environmental groups have spent 38 years using the EIS process to force the BLM to do a full survey before any permits or any kind of serious work can begin on anything. They're not about to change now.
Its illogical to blame Bush for an environmental law that is 38 years old. If you object to the EIS process, then IMHO you'd be smarter to work to change the EIS process itself rather then blaming Bush for something he has no control over.
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 5210 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
The NEPA process
The NEPA process is designed to involve the public and gather the best available information in a single place so that decision makers can be fully informed when they make their choices.
The process has the following steps:
Scoping: When a project is first proposed, the agency announces it with a notice in the Federal Register, notices in local media, and letters to citizens and groups that it knows are likely to be interested. Citizens and groups are welcome to send in comments helping the agency identify the issues it must address in the EIS (or EA).
Draft EIS: Based on both agency expertise, and issues raised by the public the agency prepares a Draft EIS with a full description of the affected environment, a reasonable range of alternatives, and an analysis of the impacts of each alternative. The public is then provided a second opportunity to provide comments.
Final EIS and Proposed Action: Based on the comments on the Draft EIS, the agency writes a Final EIS, and announces its Proposed Action. The public is not invited to comment on this, but if they are still unhappy, or feel that the agency has missed a major issue, they may protest the EIS to the Director of the agency. The Director may either ask the agency to revise the EIS, or explain to the protester why their complaints are not actually taken care of.
Record of Decision: Once all the protests are resolved the agency issues a Record of Decision which is its final action prior to implementation.
If members of the public are still dissatisfied with the outcome they may sue the agency in Federal court.
--------------
Surely no environmental group would object to a groovy little solar power company bulldozing roads and construction pads and building miles of high power transmission lines through the wilderness and building ugly solar installations in the middle of the ecologically sensitive desert turtle mating grounds and the ancient sacred land and burial grounds of the local Indian nation and casino operator?
Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:08 pm Post subject: Re: Bush Kills off Solar Energy Citing "Environmental&a
TWilliam wrote:
MyOldTDiIsStillGoing wrote:
TWilliam wrote:
Watch this little public prank and pay close attention to how the 'victims' respond, and you might begin to get an idea...
Scary. And the people who are moving around will be the ones, if they have the capability, to select the next president and leaders of the United States. Even scarier: who are the actual, real zombies in this video?
Yep. And did you catch the comment from the guy standing behind the one in line about 'I think we should cut this guy' (meaning cut in front of him in line, not cut him with a knife)? Did you also notice how no one even so much as touched any of the pranksters to see if they'd get a response?
We've really become a nation of mindless voyeurs. As long as it doesn't directly impact us (as in 'ball-bat-upside-the-head' impact), we just watch with mouths agape while making little if any effort to intervene.
I remember a similar experience I had several years back. Myself and a group of friends were in a Kmart, and just for giggles we grabbed a ball from the toy section and started playing 'soccer' throughout the store. We went on for I'd say a good half hour or so, and not one person even acknowledged what we were doing. Not customers, not staff. It was almost as if we were invisible. Very bizarre...
Yep, if the person said "should we cut" and this was down in Brooklyn, well the knife might happen. However, since Flushing is up in Queens, probably safe to say they were just cutting in front. But the conversations, unbelievable. Again, who are the real zombies in this video?
The ones who as you state: "We've really become a nation of mindless voyeurs." These are the ones who will vote for someone because "there is hope" or "time for a change" but no one ask: what are you offering that gives hope of substance or what is it that will change? And then, years down the road, these zombies wake up and realize they are under a totalitarian rule and realize, oh, that was the change. However, keep the people drugged, and they won't ask. I got to re-read 1984 to refresh my memory of this state of mind that society is sleep walking to.
As for the K-Mart thing, my buddies did the same thing hear a few years ago. Same results. However, I remember when I was a kid in the late '60's. If we did something majorly wrong at a neighbors house, I would get walloped up by my friend's dad, and then he would drag my ass home, and get another walloping by my mom. It was the double smack down that happened back then. People got involved dealing with others when it was needed. _________________ THE SIMPLE LIFE: One frozen pond, a few sticks, a little round puck, and a bunch of rowdy kids.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
