|
|
| OOO! Random thought! (Re: NYS Wind Map (Gas Hits $3.15 in California)) (20263) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
OOO! Random thought! (Re: NYS Wind Map (Gas Hits $3.15 in California)) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Mar 20 10:17:28 2005, in response to Re: NYS Wind Map (Gas Hits $3.15 in California), posted by Orange Blossom Express on Sun Mar 20 09:46:21 2005. One of the things that was learned on the Norge/Swedish peninsula was that geothermal "extraction" DOES have subtle influences on the "underground" ... let's say we put up a HUGE amount of windmills. Anyone who understands aerodynamics (more properly "fluid dynamics") realizes that if you dissipate energy into a "sink", that the patterns and waveflows of those "diminished by apsorption" dynamics can result in changes to the natural "eddies" downwind from the point of absorption of that energy. Ellenville is already showing subtle forestation effects among trees generally downwind of the turbines ... not anything MUCH as yet, but noticeable. Deserves more observation before conclusion, but conclusions appear evident until PROVEN.Any time you disturb natural flows (as in geothermal, windmill, or HAARP) of atmospherics, meteorological effects occur - compare ATLANTA as one of the best examples of "modification" as it occurred faster there than in most other "POOF! You're a CITY!" situations of sufficient observation time ... Windmills modify their climate ... but the question IS ... how SUBSTANTIAL *is* the "butterfly effect?" As an engineer, if isotopes can now be chemically reduced, there ARE stable isotopes which can be made of nuclear waste that are no longer "radioactive" in *ANY* way as they've achieved a "stable" nucleus ... we're apparently getting close, at least for SOME isotopes. The question of STORAGE of what's dangerous now could very likely be neutralized 50-100 yeras from now, long before the shelf-life of the liners of the waste would decay sufficiently to pose a risk. Yeah, yeah, said it before, I understand. Radioactive daughter products DO decay into stable compounds if the "physics" is right in a particular situation. Hell - there's a LONG line of lead up and down the valleys from Jersey to Albany county - there's RADON emissions and there's LEAD ... and some natural uranium as well in that lode ... point being that lead, though poisonous is a BARRIER to radioactivity and not radioactive itself ... If we DON'T do windmills and nukes, then we're GOING to burn COAL ... and COAL has radioactive FALLOUT when it's burned ... google it yourself if you don't believe me ... COAL provides radioactive fallout because it tends to vein where there's uranium. But don't believe me. With Oil through the roof, and republicans giggling and stroking their ... uh ... memberships ... ONLY answer other than nukes is COAL. Choose. :( |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|