![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article Jim Logajan writes:
"Jay Honeck" wrote: 3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are lifted. Not needed: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg Oh, in my previous post, I forgot to mention the drawback that next time the government decides to run in circles about security from aircraft, they will probably ban us from flying near these nuclear plants again, so not all is good about them. Last time they were including a small plant that had been decomissioned in 1967, and had no nuclear material remaining on site. It just sat in a major VFR flyway. Alan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Oh, in my previous post, I forgot to mention the drawback that next time
the government decides to run in circles about security from aircraft, they will probably ban us from flying near these nuclear plants again, so not all is good about them. I believe that issue has been reasonably addressed with the Feds. See these videos to know why: http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photoga...crete-wall.wmv http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photoga..._test_slow.mpg http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photoga...4crashtest.mpg -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" "Alan" wrote in message ... In article Jim Logajan writes: "Jay Honeck" wrote: 3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are lifted. Not needed: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg Oh, in my previous post, I forgot to mention the drawback that next time the government decides to run in circles about security from aircraft, they will probably ban us from flying near these nuclear plants again, so not all is good about them. Last time they were including a small plant that had been decomissioned in 1967, and had no nuclear material remaining on site. It just sat in a major VFR flyway. Alan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck wrote:
I think your desire to blame environmentalists is an oversimplification of a complicated situation. I think your description of short-sighted leadership is probably pretty correct, but not for the reasons you like to believe. Of course there are many aspects of the energy problem. They are all, however, exacerbated by stupid, over-the-top environmental rules that are abused by folks with a not-so-hidden agenda. Just TRY to get something as simple as, oh, say, a runway extension completed, and observe the almost unbelievable quantity of environmental red tape that must be overcome. Now imagine building an OIL REFINERY. Ain't gonna happen with the current set of rules. If I were "King for a day", I would decree the following "4 Steps to American Energy Independence": 1. New refineries are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent them from being constructed. As of now, all environmental restrictions on oil refinery construction are lifted. 2. New oil is not being pumped because draconian environmental rules prevent new oil fields from being developed. As of now all environmental restrictions on development of known oil reserves are lifted. 3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are lifted. 4. By decree, hydrogen fuel is now the way of the future -- period. From this point on, by my decree, the scientific and industrial capacity of the United States will be used to perfect a hydrogen distribution system to replace our current gasoline distribution system, and all cars will be powered by hydrogen. Source: http://tinyurl.com/6hklhf These four steps will, in a matter of a decade, resolve 90% of our problems. Unfortunately, it will take another Great Depression to shake our system enough to force a repeal of the environmental restrictions that make resolving our energy problems impossible. Well, Jay, just let me say I'm glad you aren't king! :-) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck wrote:
1. New refineries are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent them from being constructed. As of now, all environmental restrictions on oil refinery construction are lifted. A bigger reason that new oil refineries aren't being built, as well as nuclear waste facilities, is that no one wants one near his playground. Everyone wants a new refinery in someone else's backyard. Any way you cut it, oil companies undeniably have the profits to build refineries, but where is it going to be located? You can't blame environmentalists for everything you don't like. Over the last almost eight years I haven't noticed any environmentalists running the show in Washington. Quite the opposite, in fact, but the price of oil continues to climb, obviously due to factors other than your phantom environmentalists. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You can't blame environmentalists for everything you don't like. Over the
last almost eight years I haven't noticed any environmentalists running the show in Washington. Quite the opposite, in fact, but the price of oil continues to climb, obviously due to factors other than your phantom environmentalists. Reality check he Politicians in Washington don't run the country -- bureaucrats (who persist from election cycle to election cycle) do. Whether it's Republicrats or Democrans matters not, in the short term. Over the last forty years, environmentalists have innocently and quietly influenced the wording and structure of our regulations in a way that has ultimately made it quite impossible to address our current energy issues. It's all been innocuous, and "for the children" -- but it's completely hog-tied us now that we really ARE in an energy bind. Which, of course, anyone who knows the "Law of Unintended Consequences" predicted long ago. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:38:30 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote: You can't blame environmentalists for everything you don't like. Over the last almost eight years I haven't noticed any environmentalists running the show in Washington. Quite the opposite, in fact, but the price of oil continues to climb, obviously due to factors other than your phantom environmentalists. Reality check he Politicians in Washington don't run the country -- bureaucrats (who persist from election cycle to election cycle) do. Whether it's Republicrats or Democrans matters not, in the short term. Over the last forty years, environmentalists have innocently and quietly influenced the wording and structure of our regulations in a way that has ultimately made it quite impossible to address our current energy issues. It's all been innocuous, and "for the children" -- but it's completely hog-tied us now that we really ARE in an energy bind. Horse hockey. We've painted ourselves into a corner by building an economy based on unrenewable, cheap energy. Which, of course, anyone who knows the "Law of Unintended Consequences" predicted long ago. Anyone knowing the law of supply and demand, you mean. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2008-04-09, Jay Honeck wrote:
Over the last forty years, environmentalists have innocently and quietly influenced the wording and structure of our regulations in a way that has ultimately made it quite impossible to address our current energy issues. That's patently untrue. Environmental regulation, on the other hand, has at least made those of us who have oil refineries in their back yard a reasonable quality of life. It's all been innocuous, and "for the children" -- but it's completely hog-tied us now that we really ARE in an energy bind. It's for the adults, too. I've lived in an oil town, and even with the environmental regulations we have today, the sky still turns green over La Porte, and after flying a clean aircraft for a half hour, you land and there's a film of gunk adhering to the leading edges of everything. This is Texas City, Baytown, La Porte and most of the east side of Houston today, not a story from antiquity. If you're flying the ILS into Galveston, you can do without a marker beacon in your panel - the air gets a unique stench as you approach the outer marker (and for most of the rest of the approach). Texas City residents just have to live with that stench. The examiner I had for my instrument rating checkride came from Beaumont. He's the lived the longest out of any member of his recent family - 50 years old. When he was a kid growing up, the rivers used to catch fire. If that's what you really want, are you prepared to live in an oil town? It's terribly easy to sit in rural Iowa and decree that oil towns should be cancerous armpits. Having lived in an oil town, I think the environmental regulations aren't tight enough. Why don't you campaign locally to get oil refineries set up in Iowa City? -- From the sunny Isle of Man. Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
romeomike schrieb:
A bigger reason that new oil refineries aren't being built, as well as nuclear waste facilities, is that no one wants one near his playground. So maybe Jay should jump in and start a petition (he is good in such things) for an oil raffinery close to his hotel and to the airport and a nuclear power plant close to his home. #m |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Martin Hotze wrote:
romeomike schrieb: A bigger reason that new oil refineries aren't being built, as well as nuclear waste facilities, is that no one wants one near his playground. So maybe Jay should jump in and start a petition (he is good in such things) for an oil raffinery close to his hotel and to the airport and a nuclear power plant close to his home. #m No, he'd want some environmentalists to come use all those regulations he detests to save HIS environment. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() A bigger reason that new oil refineries aren't being built, as well as nuclear waste facilities, is that no one wants one near his playground. Everyone wants a new refinery in someone else's backyard. Yep. A case in point was San Jose when the new Cisco plant went in. Sure it caused brownouts, but when it came time for a new power plant, the Cisco people in city planning argued that a power plant in their backyard would ruin the view for the workers at the factory. As a result of that and the Enron shenanigans, electricity rates in Oregon went through the roof. And, by the way, haven't come down since. Nevada keeps talking about burying the entire world's nuclear waste in the Nevada test site where nothing lives and nobody goes, but California NIMBYs don't want a nuke railroad running through their state. -c |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My 302 and PDA are no longer on speaking terms | Dixie Sierra | Soaring | 4 | September 10th 07 05:16 PM |
Some IFR GPS's no longer useable | kevmor | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | May 28th 07 02:27 AM |
Jepp no longer in the GA business...? | John Harper | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | June 17th 04 10:49 PM |
Some airmen facing longer deployments | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 16th 04 08:34 PM |