UncleMoose’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Merits of an offshore wind farm

  The point I was trying to make is that preserving small fishing and clamming interests for local consumption could be part of a strategy to combat global warming.

  I hadn't thought that putting the windmills farther offshore might create a barrier capable of keeping big trawlers out while allowing locals to keep fishing while hopefully helping the fish and their habitat recover.

  However, I'm still not convinced that this is economically feasable, plus there is still the specter of fuel and chemical leaks from the transformers. Plus, won't the windfarm become an underwater windfarm as sea levels rise from melting ice caps? Better to locate the windfarm on higher ground inland.

  Maybe use a portion of the profits to build a fence of nautical "cal-trops" like the one the Sea Sheperd deployed near Newfoundland to keep the trawlers out? ;> A man can dream....On Climate change is pushing this easygoing enviro over the edge posted 3 years, 9 months ago 57 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Merits of an offshore wind farm

  The point I was trying to make is that preserving small fishing and clamming interests for local consumption could be part of a strategy to combat global warming.

  I hadn't thought that putting the windmills farther offshore might create a barrier capable of keeping big trawlers out while allowing locals to keep fishing while hopefully helping the fish and their habitat recover.

  However, I'm still not convinced that this is economically feasable, plus there is still the specter of fuel and chemical leaks from the transformers. Plus, won't the windfarm become an underwater windfarm as sea levels rise from melting ice caps? Better to locate the windfarm on higher ground inland.

  Maybe use a portion of the profits to build a fence of nautical "cal-trops" like the one the Sea Sheperd deployed near Newfoundland to keep the trawlers out? ;> A man can dream....On RFK Jr. and other prominent enviros face off over Cape Cod wind farm posted 3 years, 9 months ago 57 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Put the Wind Farm on shore!

  To further clarify my position:

  • RFK's idea of putting the windfarm farther out at sea is ridiculous
    
  • Putting it where proposed is not a great idea, as it may harm fish and birds
    
  • Bill McKibben et al are being too myopic

  Perhaps a better idea would be to put the Wind farm on shore nearer to where the majority of the power is needed and in an area that is not a major flyway. (It is well documented that migratory birds use coast lines and major waterways as flyways) In this way, losses to transmission and bird and fish casualties are lessened.

  The point about oil platforms is also good, but does not address the reality of flyways or fishing.On Climate change is pushing this easygoing enviro over the edge posted 3 years, 9 months ago 57 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Put the Wind Farm on shore!

  To further clarify my position:

  • RFK's idea of putting the windfarm farther out at sea is ridiculous
    
  • Putting it where proposed is not a great idea, as it may harm fish and birds
    
  • Bill McKibben et al are being too myopic

  Perhaps a better idea would be to put the Wind farm on shore nearer to where the majority of the power is needed and in an area that is not a major flyway. (It is well documented that migratory birds use coast lines and major waterways as flyways) In this way, losses to transmission and bird and fish casualties are lessened.

  The point about oil platforms is also good, but does not address the reality of flyways or fishing.On RFK Jr. and other prominent enviros face off over Cape Cod wind farm posted 3 years, 9 months ago 57 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  More on "Getting it"

  Bill McKibben says:

  "It's just that when [other environmental] efforts come into conflict with the imperative need to act urgently on global warming, they have to take second place."

  If Bill is right - that everything else has to take a back seat - is the question really that we need more generating capacity, or is it that we need to conserve severely and get local? Living as I do, without electricity and with extremely efficient wood heat, I am notice that most people are thinking more about the former and less about the later. In order to succeed, I think we will need both approaches.

  However, in order for the latter approach to succeed, we will need to preserve the ecosystems which can support our less technological existance.

  Lets consider food, for example. One of the lowest impact forms of protein is individually harvested wild meat and fish. Certainly, there is not enough for everyone, but if rural people better used these resources sustainably rather than trucking in meat from feedlots (industrial ag is a huge CO2 source!) we'd all be better served.

  However, if in our haste to defeat global warming we build windmills where they destroy important wildlife habitat, then local people become that much more dependant on fossil fuels.

  Yes, Global Warming should be our priority, but success lies in more than just putting up wind mills - we need a wholistic approach. This is incompatable with the myopic authoritarian statements of Mr. McKibben and others.

  P.S. I also think Kennedy's statements reak of entitlement, but its not the real heart of the matter.On Climate change is pushing this easygoing enviro over the edge posted 3 years, 9 months ago 57 Responses