Wind Farm Seeks Permit to KILL GOLDEN EAGLES

[westwall]

The extent of the damages is so much clearer when you can see it all.

Canadian Oil Sands ? Photo Gallery ? National Geographic Magazine

And that affects a far smaller area than the windfarms.

One would have to be willfully ignorant to compare wind farms to oil sand mining operations. Congratulations.

Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

Willfully ignorant? Yes olfraud, that describes you, and your clones, to a "T".

 

[bripat9643]

I think we're being told that two wrongs do make a right. Our libtard friend defends permitting eyesore wind farms to commit wholesale murder of raptors, and other birds, justifying his defense because at one time someone mined the means to heat our homes and power industry.
It's very much like justifying every aberrant and anti-social behavior of their beloved messiah by their observing the "Bush did it!". (Whether Bush did, or didn't, is irrelevant to the argument.)

What a bizarre school of red herrings.

This is about the business of survival beyond the life of fossil fuels. This is about having a future.

You aren't interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels, so that claim is obviously a lie.

 

[bripat9643]

One would have to be willfully ignorant to compare wind farms to oil sand mining operations. Congratulations.

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

 

[orogenicman]

And that affects a far smaller area than the windfarms.

One would have to be willfully ignorant to compare wind farms to oil sand mining operations. Congratulations.

Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

Willfully ignorant? Yes olfraud, that describes you, and your clones, to a "T".

You wanted ground truth images of mines. I gave you that and more. Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

 

[orogenicman]

I think we're being told that two wrongs do make a right. Our libtard friend defends permitting eyesore wind farms to commit wholesale murder of raptors, and other birds, justifying his defense because at one time someone mined the means to heat our homes and power industry.
It's very much like justifying every aberrant and anti-social behavior of their beloved messiah by their observing the "Bush did it!". (Whether Bush did, or didn't, is irrelevant to the argument.)

What a bizarre school of red herrings.

This is about the business of survival beyond the life of fossil fuels. This is about having a future.

You aren't interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels, so that claim is obviously a lie.

Why would ANYONE be interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels. How friggin stupid is THAT?

 

[jon_berzerk]

You said you could post all sorts of pictures of the mines from ground level. Please do so. Or are you going to admit you can't and were in fact lying as usual, olfraud.

Acid mine drainage from a mine near Pittsburg, PA.

On April 1st, the EPA announced strict new guidelines on the allowable levels of water pollutants for new valley fill permits. Coal companies complained that the new guidelines are too stringent and that the water coming out of valley fills is safer than a lot of bottled water. Bottoms up, boys.

Coal ash slurry pond failure in Tennessee.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ats3dClc0No]TVA Coal Ash Spill Emory River Tennessee - YouTube[/ame]

Coal sludge impoundment.

Is there any doubt that the mining companies are fudging data?

Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

Yep, that's the sort of thing I've been cleaning up for decades. The iron precipitates look bad but in the long run aren't truly dangerous. They do indicate other elements that ARE dangerous however. But, on an eyesore level this is far less than mile after mile of wind farm.

at least one of the photos originated from a leftist propaganda school

--LOL

 

[westwall]

One would have to be willfully ignorant to compare wind farms to oil sand mining operations. Congratulations.

Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

Willfully ignorant? Yes olfraud, that describes you, and your clones, to a "T".

You wanted ground truth images of mines. I gave you that and more. Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

What analytical results?

 

[orogenicman]

Willfully ignorant? Yes olfraud, that describes you, and your clones, to a "T".

You wanted ground truth images of mines. I gave you that and more. Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

What analytical results?

How soon they forget:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7925465-post182.html

 

[westwall]

You wanted ground truth images of mines. I gave you that and more. Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

What analytical results?

How soon they forget:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7925465-post182.html

No, I didn't forget I just didn't read all of your drivel. The point of the photo was to show that solar was polluting as well. As far as your order for me to do work,fuck you. I'm not your lackey olfraud. You want work from me, you pay me, I'll even give you a break and take 100 an hour, paid to the charity of my choice.

 

[bripat9643]

What a bizarre school of red herrings.

This is about the business of survival beyond the life of fossil fuels. This is about having a future.

You aren't interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels, so that claim is obviously a lie.

Why would ANYONE be interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels. How friggin stupid is THAT?

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

 

[orogenicman]

You aren't interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels, so that claim is obviously a lie.

Why would ANYONE be interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels. How friggin stupid is THAT?

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out | Motherboard

Oil companies have been one of the most powerful opponents of renewable energy—but now, one of the biggest is predicting that it will dominate the world's power supply in a matter of decades.

Like the tobacco companies of yesteryear, oil companies have spent a veritable mountain of money fighting legislation that might promote alternative energy sources or threaten to make their product more expensive. They have done so both by funding psuedoscience that raises doubt climate change, and by lobbying the government directly to weaken or abandon laws that would penalize companies for polluting—which is necessary to make clean energy truly competitive.

For a point of reference, Exxon alone spent more money lobbying against the clean energy and climate change bill of 2009 than the entire clean energy industry combined. But apparently Big Oil has had a change of heart—or has made a slyly manipulative move. Either way, Shell's latest "New Lens" report about the future of energy comes with a somewhat surprising conclusion: Solar energy will provide the lion's share of the world's power by 2100.

Sun power will meet 37.7% of the world's demand, according to Shell's analysis.

Oil (10%) and biofuels (9.5%) are next up, followed by wind power (8.4%), natural gas (7.5%), and nuclear (6.3%). Coal is down to a piddling 4%, on the brink of extinction. Geothermal will produce a surprising, 4.4%, according to Shell.

The report predicts that oil prices will continue to rise, and will come to be considered as too volatile for investors and corporations. The fracking boom will peter out yielding less gas than expected, and governments will get their asses in gear and promote clean energy-friendly policies.

Specifically, "distributed" solar like rooftop or community arrays, will see a boom.

"These conditions favour distributed solar pv becoming a leading source of primary energy in the global economy," the report claims. "From its position today as the 13th largest energy source worldwide, it grows rapidly, reaching fourth place behind oil, gas, and coal by 2040, and continuing to the number one position in 2100."

The report however, stops short of giving renewable energy its full due—it claims at highest, clean energy can create just 60-70% of the world's energy. We'll still need oil, see, says the oil company. There are, of course, plenty of very smart scientists who would beg to differ. These Stanford researchers, after all, found that we could get pretty close to 100% renewables in just twenty years if we found the political will to do so. Other more cautious scientists have found that 95 percent clean energy by 2050 is entirely possible.

So Shell's projections are clearly pretty conservative, but seeing as how they're being made by an oil company factoring in its own interests highly in the mix, they're still worth noting. And the fact that the percentage of oil in the energy mix does shrink—in the US, right now, oil accounts for 34 percent of energy use. That number is a percent or two lower worldwide. That it dwindles relatively dramatically in this outlook—electric cars, perhaps—means Shell is at least semi-cognizant of peak oil.

2100 is a long ways off. It may well be that Shell is hailing the rise of solar from this grand distance in an effort to highlight its progressive bona fides while kicking the can as far down the road as could be credible.

Still, there's something encouraging about the fact that this report is essentially Big Oil admitting the future—hedging, sure, but admitting that its lifeblood is mired in the past. It's only a matter of time, Shell says: Solar power is going to win out.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Why would ANYONE be interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels. How friggin stupid is THAT?

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out | Motherboard

Oil companies have been one of the most powerful opponents of renewable energy—but now, one of the biggest is predicting that it will dominate the world's power supply in a matter of decades.

Like the tobacco companies of yesteryear, oil companies have spent a veritable mountain of money fighting legislation that might promote alternative energy sources or threaten to make their product more expensive. They have done so both by funding psuedoscience that raises doubt climate change, and by lobbying the government directly to weaken or abandon laws that would penalize companies for polluting—which is necessary to make clean energy truly competitive.

For a point of reference, Exxon alone spent more money lobbying against the clean energy and climate change bill of 2009 than the entire clean energy industry combined. But apparently Big Oil has had a change of heart—or has made a slyly manipulative move. Either way, Shell's latest "New Lens" report about the future of energy comes with a somewhat surprising conclusion: Solar energy will provide the lion's share of the world's power by 2100.

Sun power will meet 37.7% of the world's demand, according to Shell's analysis.

Oil (10%) and biofuels (9.5%) are next up, followed by wind power (8.4%), natural gas (7.5%), and nuclear (6.3%). Coal is down to a piddling 4%, on the brink of extinction. Geothermal will produce a surprising, 4.4%, according to Shell.

The report predicts that oil prices will continue to rise, and will come to be considered as too volatile for investors and corporations. The fracking boom will peter out yielding less gas than expected, and governments will get their asses in gear and promote clean energy-friendly policies.

Specifically, "distributed" solar like rooftop or community arrays, will see a boom.

"These conditions favour distributed solar pv becoming a leading source of primary energy in the global economy," the report claims. "From its position today as the 13th largest energy source worldwide, it grows rapidly, reaching fourth place behind oil, gas, and coal by 2040, and continuing to the number one position in 2100."

The report however, stops short of giving renewable energy its full due—it claims at highest, clean energy can create just 60-70% of the world's energy. We'll still need oil, see, says the oil company. There are, of course, plenty of very smart scientists who would beg to differ. These Stanford researchers, after all, found that we could get pretty close to 100% renewables in just twenty years if we found the political will to do so. Other more cautious scientists have found that 95 percent clean energy by 2050 is entirely possible.

So Shell's projections are clearly pretty conservative, but seeing as how they're being made by an oil company factoring in its own interests highly in the mix, they're still worth noting. And the fact that the percentage of oil in the energy mix does shrink—in the US, right now, oil accounts for 34 percent of energy use. That number is a percent or two lower worldwide. That it dwindles relatively dramatically in this outlook—electric cars, perhaps—means Shell is at least semi-cognizant of peak oil.

2100 is a long ways off. It may well be that Shell is hailing the rise of solar from this grand distance in an effort to highlight its progressive bona fides while kicking the can as far down the road as could be credible.

Still, there's something encouraging about the fact that this report is essentially Big Oil admitting the future—hedging, sure, but admitting that its lifeblood is mired in the past. It's only a matter of time, Shell says: Solar power is going to win out.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

certainly

but then what are you going to do with the 85 percent waste

namely the gas and diesel

 

[gallantwarrior]

The extent of the damages is so much clearer when you can see it all.

Canadian Oil Sands ? Photo Gallery ? National Geographic Magazine

And that affects a far smaller area than the windfarms.

One would have to be willfully ignorant to compare wind farms to oil sand mining operations. Congratulations.

Now, about those analytical results you were going to give us...

You admit that you are willfully ignorant then?

 

[mamooth]

It is hilarious, watching so many of the kooks actually declare how strip mines are wonderful compared to windmills. They really are that batshit crazy, and they advertise it. Their cult has ordered to them to act batshit crazy, and they need everyone else in the cult to see what loyal cultists they are.

 

[flacaltenn]

Why would ANYONE be interested in waiting until the end of fossil fuels. How friggin stupid is THAT?

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out | Motherboard

Oil companies have been one of the most powerful opponents of renewable energy—but now, one of the biggest is predicting that it will dominate the world's power supply in a matter of decades.

Like the tobacco companies of yesteryear, oil companies have spent a veritable mountain of money fighting legislation that might promote alternative energy sources or threaten to make their product more expensive. They have done so both by funding psuedoscience that raises doubt climate change, and by lobbying the government directly to weaken or abandon laws that would penalize companies for polluting—which is necessary to make clean energy truly competitive.

For a point of reference, Exxon alone spent more money lobbying against the clean energy and climate change bill of 2009 than the entire clean energy industry combined. But apparently Big Oil has had a change of heart—or has made a slyly manipulative move. Either way, Shell's latest "New Lens" report about the future of energy comes with a somewhat surprising conclusion: Solar energy will provide the lion's share of the world's power by 2100.

Sun power will meet 37.7% of the world's demand, according to Shell's analysis.

Oil (10%) and biofuels (9.5%) are next up, followed by wind power (8.4%), natural gas (7.5%), and nuclear (6.3%). Coal is down to a piddling 4%, on the brink of extinction. Geothermal will produce a surprising, 4.4%, according to Shell.

The report predicts that oil prices will continue to rise, and will come to be considered as too volatile for investors and corporations. The fracking boom will peter out yielding less gas than expected, and governments will get their asses in gear and promote clean energy-friendly policies.

Specifically, "distributed" solar like rooftop or community arrays, will see a boom.

"These conditions favour distributed solar pv becoming a leading source of primary energy in the global economy," the report claims. "From its position today as the 13th largest energy source worldwide, it grows rapidly, reaching fourth place behind oil, gas, and coal by 2040, and continuing to the number one position in 2100."

The report however, stops short of giving renewable energy its full due—it claims at highest, clean energy can create just 60-70% of the world's energy. We'll still need oil, see, says the oil company. There are, of course, plenty of very smart scientists who would beg to differ. These Stanford researchers, after all, found that we could get pretty close to 100% renewables in just twenty years if we found the political will to do so. Other more cautious scientists have found that 95 percent clean energy by 2050 is entirely possible.

So Shell's projections are clearly pretty conservative, but seeing as how they're being made by an oil company factoring in its own interests highly in the mix, they're still worth noting. And the fact that the percentage of oil in the energy mix does shrink—in the US, right now, oil accounts for 34 percent of energy use. That number is a percent or two lower worldwide. That it dwindles relatively dramatically in this outlook—electric cars, perhaps—means Shell is at least semi-cognizant of peak oil.

2100 is a long ways off. It may well be that Shell is hailing the rise of solar from this grand distance in an effort to highlight its progressive bona fides while kicking the can as far down the road as could be credible.

Still, there's something encouraging about the fact that this report is essentially Big Oil admitting the future—hedging, sure, but admitting that its lifeblood is mired in the past. It's only a matter of time, Shell says: Solar power is going to win out.

What a load of crap.. Solar is not powering a single 7-11 store today, tomorrow or in a decade.. 37% of LOAD?? Yeah sure ===== Where the fuck is that? Minnesota? Oregon? Canada? Germany? Just the SITING ISSUES make that a whack job comment. Multiply that by an 8 hour work day and costs of providing ACTUAL REAL RELIABLE PRIMARY POWER --- and you'll reach the same irate state the Germans have when they realized how much of their utility bill has be SQUANDERED on things that are NOT TRULY ALTERNATIVES...

 

[PMZ]

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out | Motherboard

Oil companies have been one of the most powerful opponents of renewable energy—but now, one of the biggest is predicting that it will dominate the world's power supply in a matter of decades.

Like the tobacco companies of yesteryear, oil companies have spent a veritable mountain of money fighting legislation that might promote alternative energy sources or threaten to make their product more expensive. They have done so both by funding psuedoscience that raises doubt climate change, and by lobbying the government directly to weaken or abandon laws that would penalize companies for polluting—which is necessary to make clean energy truly competitive.

For a point of reference, Exxon alone spent more money lobbying against the clean energy and climate change bill of 2009 than the entire clean energy industry combined. But apparently Big Oil has had a change of heart—or has made a slyly manipulative move. Either way, Shell's latest "New Lens" report about the future of energy comes with a somewhat surprising conclusion: Solar energy will provide the lion's share of the world's power by 2100.

Sun power will meet 37.7% of the world's demand, according to Shell's analysis.

Oil (10%) and biofuels (9.5%) are next up, followed by wind power (8.4%), natural gas (7.5%), and nuclear (6.3%). Coal is down to a piddling 4%, on the brink of extinction. Geothermal will produce a surprising, 4.4%, according to Shell.

The report predicts that oil prices will continue to rise, and will come to be considered as too volatile for investors and corporations. The fracking boom will peter out yielding less gas than expected, and governments will get their asses in gear and promote clean energy-friendly policies.

Specifically, "distributed" solar like rooftop or community arrays, will see a boom.

"These conditions favour distributed solar pv becoming a leading source of primary energy in the global economy," the report claims. "From its position today as the 13th largest energy source worldwide, it grows rapidly, reaching fourth place behind oil, gas, and coal by 2040, and continuing to the number one position in 2100."

The report however, stops short of giving renewable energy its full due—it claims at highest, clean energy can create just 60-70% of the world's energy. We'll still need oil, see, says the oil company. There are, of course, plenty of very smart scientists who would beg to differ. These Stanford researchers, after all, found that we could get pretty close to 100% renewables in just twenty years if we found the political will to do so. Other more cautious scientists have found that 95 percent clean energy by 2050 is entirely possible.

So Shell's projections are clearly pretty conservative, but seeing as how they're being made by an oil company factoring in its own interests highly in the mix, they're still worth noting. And the fact that the percentage of oil in the energy mix does shrink—in the US, right now, oil accounts for 34 percent of energy use. That number is a percent or two lower worldwide. That it dwindles relatively dramatically in this outlook—electric cars, perhaps—means Shell is at least semi-cognizant of peak oil.

2100 is a long ways off. It may well be that Shell is hailing the rise of solar from this grand distance in an effort to highlight its progressive bona fides while kicking the can as far down the road as could be credible.

Still, there's something encouraging about the fact that this report is essentially Big Oil admitting the future—hedging, sure, but admitting that its lifeblood is mired in the past. It's only a matter of time, Shell says: Solar power is going to win out.

What a load of crap.. Solar is not powering a single 7-11 store today, tomorrow or in a decade.. 37% of LOAD?? Yeah sure ===== Where the fuck is that? Minnesota? Oregon? Canada? Germany? Just the SITING ISSUES make that a whack job comment. Multiply that by an 8 hour work day and costs of providing ACTUAL REAL RELIABLE PRIMARY POWER --- and you'll reach the same irate state the Germans have when they realized how much of their utility bill has be SQUANDERED on things that are NOT TRULY ALTERNATIVES...

There's quite a gap between your imagination and what progress is capable of.

http://www.dailytech.com/80+Percent...ith+Renewable+Energy+in+2050/article24970.htm

 

[PMZ]

It is hilarious, watching so many of the kooks actually declare how strip mines are wonderful compared to windmills. They really are that batshit crazy, and they advertise it. Their cult has ordered to them to act batshit crazy, and they need everyone else in the cult to see what loyal cultists they are.

Right on. They are in lemming mode now and the cliff is in sight. In fact their leaders are already acknowledging ''oh shit!!!''

We should start a pool on when the last one takes the dive.

 

[PMZ]

Leaving 80% of a resource in the ground to achieve some totally ridiculous agenda that will make life harder for everyone is friggin stupid.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out

Big Oil Says Solar Power Will Win Out | Motherboard

Oil companies have been one of the most powerful opponents of renewable energy—but now, one of the biggest is predicting that it will dominate the world's power supply in a matter of decades.

Like the tobacco companies of yesteryear, oil companies have spent a veritable mountain of money fighting legislation that might promote alternative energy sources or threaten to make their product more expensive. They have done so both by funding psuedoscience that raises doubt climate change, and by lobbying the government directly to weaken or abandon laws that would penalize companies for polluting—which is necessary to make clean energy truly competitive.

For a point of reference, Exxon alone spent more money lobbying against the clean energy and climate change bill of 2009 than the entire clean energy industry combined. But apparently Big Oil has had a change of heart—or has made a slyly manipulative move. Either way, Shell's latest "New Lens" report about the future of energy comes with a somewhat surprising conclusion: Solar energy will provide the lion's share of the world's power by 2100.

Sun power will meet 37.7% of the world's demand, according to Shell's analysis.

Oil (10%) and biofuels (9.5%) are next up, followed by wind power (8.4%), natural gas (7.5%), and nuclear (6.3%). Coal is down to a piddling 4%, on the brink of extinction. Geothermal will produce a surprising, 4.4%, according to Shell.

The report predicts that oil prices will continue to rise, and will come to be considered as too volatile for investors and corporations. The fracking boom will peter out yielding less gas than expected, and governments will get their asses in gear and promote clean energy-friendly policies.

Specifically, "distributed" solar like rooftop or community arrays, will see a boom.

"These conditions favour distributed solar pv becoming a leading source of primary energy in the global economy," the report claims. "From its position today as the 13th largest energy source worldwide, it grows rapidly, reaching fourth place behind oil, gas, and coal by 2040, and continuing to the number one position in 2100."

The report however, stops short of giving renewable energy its full due—it claims at highest, clean energy can create just 60-70% of the world's energy. We'll still need oil, see, says the oil company. There are, of course, plenty of very smart scientists who would beg to differ. These Stanford researchers, after all, found that we could get pretty close to 100% renewables in just twenty years if we found the political will to do so. Other more cautious scientists have found that 95 percent clean energy by 2050 is entirely possible.

So Shell's projections are clearly pretty conservative, but seeing as how they're being made by an oil company factoring in its own interests highly in the mix, they're still worth noting. And the fact that the percentage of oil in the energy mix does shrink—in the US, right now, oil accounts for 34 percent of energy use. That number is a percent or two lower worldwide. That it dwindles relatively dramatically in this outlook—electric cars, perhaps—means Shell is at least semi-cognizant of peak oil.

2100 is a long ways off. It may well be that Shell is hailing the rise of solar from this grand distance in an effort to highlight its progressive bona fides while kicking the can as far down the road as could be credible.

Still, there's something encouraging about the fact that this report is essentially Big Oil admitting the future—hedging, sure, but admitting that its lifeblood is mired in the past. It's only a matter of time, Shell says: Solar power is going to win out.

There are other, much more important uses for oil than burning it. But you knew that. By the way,

certainly

but then what are you going to do with the 85 percent waste

namely the gas and diesel

How about different refinement techniques that eliminate making waste when there's no use for it anymore?

 

[bripat9643]

What a load of crap.. Solar is not powering a single 7-11 store today, tomorrow or in a decade.. 37% of LOAD?? Yeah sure ===== Where the fuck is that? Minnesota? Oregon? Canada? Germany? Just the SITING ISSUES make that a whack job comment. Multiply that by an 8 hour work day and costs of providing ACTUAL REAL RELIABLE PRIMARY POWER --- and you'll reach the same irate state the Germans have when they realized how much of their utility bill has be SQUANDERED on things that are NOT TRULY ALTERNATIVES...

There's quite a gap between your imagination and what progress is capable of.

DailyTech - 80 Percent of U.S. Electricity Demand Could be Met With Renewable Energy in 2050

What progress? Is solar power economically viable anywhere without government subsidies? Until it is, solar power is not progress. It's a burden on your fellow man, especially the poor.

 

[PMZ]

What a load of crap.. Solar is not powering a single 7-11 store today, tomorrow or in a decade.. 37% of LOAD?? Yeah sure ===== Where the fuck is that? Minnesota? Oregon? Canada? Germany? Just the SITING ISSUES make that a whack job comment. Multiply that by an 8 hour work day and costs of providing ACTUAL REAL RELIABLE PRIMARY POWER --- and you'll reach the same irate state the Germans have when they realized how much of their utility bill has be SQUANDERED on things that are NOT TRULY ALTERNATIVES...

There's quite a gap between your imagination and what progress is capable of.

DailyTech - 80 Percent of U.S. Electricity Demand Could be Met With Renewable Energy in 2050

What progress? Is solar power economically viable anywhere without government subsidies? Until it is, solar power is not progress. It's a burden on your fellow man, especially the poor.

What alternative do you offer?