Risk Free Energy

You can please some of the people all of the time but you can’t please the environmentalists none of the time.

I knew from the get-go it was only a matter of time before environmentalists would point toward Japan, and say, "We told you so," and then declare a moral victory for anti-nuclear activism.  Eliminating nuclear power might sound nice, but there is one big problem:  Environmentalists are trying to eliminate all the other alternatives, as well.

1.  COAL - They oppose coal because they say It’s environmentally hazardous to extract, in addition to being dangerous to miners.  And, burning it produces too much carbon dioxide and contributes to global warming.  They also say "Clean coal" is a fiction and is not worth researching.

2. OIL - They oppose oil because drilling poses a risk to the environment.  That’s primarily why the United States is not tapping its own natural resources, such as in ANWR.  Also, the U.S. has to rely on foreign powers to satisfy our "oil addiction."  This threatens our national security and is ethically questionable.  And, just like coal, they say it produces too much carbon dioxide and contributes to global warming.

3. HYDROELECTRIC POWER – It used to enjoy broad support, but that appears to no longer be the case.  Some now express concern because the process of constructing the plant itself (such as creating a reservoir) releases greenhouse gases.  Environmentalists in Ohio blocked the construction of a hydroelectric plant because it would endanger plants and inconvenience fish.  I suspect we would soon run out of acceptable places to build the damns anyway.

4. WIND POWER – It’s fashionable today to support wind power, as long as it’s not near Nantucket Sound, where it is socially acceptable to oppose the Cape Wind project on aesthetic grounds.  Others oppose wind turbines because they occasionally kill a few birds.  And we are now learning they’re not nearly as efficient as we once thought.

5. SOLAR POWER - Ideally, the world would run entirely on solar power.  It is both clean and safe, and the sun provides the planet with enough energy in a single hour to power the world for an entire year.  And the best thing is it's completely renewable.  This may someday be the solution, but that’s still many years away.  Solar cell efficiency (converting sunlight to electricity) remains an enormous technological obstacle.

 Currently, solar power only provides about 1% of our national energy, and it’s unlikely to greatly increase anytime soon.  But even if we could increase the efficiency of solar power, evidence indicates that environmentalists would oppose that, too.  In California, the construction of a solar power plant has been held up due to concerns raised over the welfare of a lizard.  Are you kidding me? A freaking LIZARD.

6. NATURAL GAS – They oppose natural gas as well.  They say that although it is much cleaner than coal, it’s still not carbon neutral.  Thus, natural gas should be avoided, too.  Well, this is where we need to draw the line and tell the greenes to go pound sand.  This is the best option we have and we need to fully utilize it until something else proves to be more efficient.

These tree huggers that never propose realistic solutions are simply not worth taking seriously.  Unfortunately, this characterizes the arguments put forth by most environmentalists.