We Should Build Stuff Like These

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itaipu_Dam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam






But the EPA takes years to allow (or not) a simple pipeline across a swamp.....it would be 10,000 years before they finished studying the matter.

These dams combined replace about 30 good sized coal plants or 36,000 wind turbines. All with essentially no pollution.

 

I don't think the US has built a major hydroelectric dam since the Glen Canyon Dam built in the 1950s.

Hydro is good practical solar power.

Powerhouse #2 at the Grand Coulee Dam has been on hold since Truman was President.

 

ya, we might inconvenience a fish.....

The EPA is blocking a new gold/copper/moly mine in Alaska because they said IF an impoundment dam were to break it would pollute a salmon river....
Now the EPA ASSUMES a disaster will happen and denies based on that.......

If the Repubs can get the senate they need to completely GUT the EPA and put in an agency that is not run by eco-nuts....(like the EPA USED to be)

 

The EPA is currently blocking an offshore oil drilling project on the North Slope of Alaska because of "excessive NOx and ammonia emissions."

NOx is regulated only because it is one of the two precursors (the other being VOC) of LA-type smog.

NOx and VOC undergo a photochemical reaction in intense sunlight to form ground-level ozone (the measureable surrogate for LA-type smog). LA smog is traditionally an urban problem but the North Slope is about as far from urban as you can get.

Even on the long days of the Arctic summer, the low-angle sunlight is too weak to drive the NOx/VOC reaction.

There is no VOC source on the North Slope, so even if the sunlight were fierce, there'd still be no smog. Gotta have all three.

The NOx comes from the engines used to drive drilling tables, pumps, generators etc. The ammonia comes from "ammonia slip." Ammonia is the reagent used to control NOx. NOx+NH4 = N2+O2+H2O. but if too much ammonia is injected, some of it "slips" (that is fails to react) and is emitted to the atmosphere.

If the unnecessary NOx requirements weren't imposed, there would be no ammonia injection.

The EPA is the enemy.

 

Proof required because I do not believe you.

 

Proof? Because I do not believe you.

 

That's OK.

I don't believe you either.

 

Remember that this is the crowd, for example, which was screamiong a year ago that all the Chevy Volts were deadly firetraps because one ignited 3 days after a severe side-impact crash test without discharging the battery.

So, a year has gone by, and the number of Volts that have burned is ... zero. Compared to thousands of gasoline cars burning up.

That's pretty much what defines the barking crazy "I hate the EPA!" crowd, the way they end up being proven totally wrong about essentially everything. They're so reliably wrong, you can make money off it -- watch what they predict, and invest the opposite way.

 

Despite truly massive subsidies, Government Motors can't give Volts away.

 

3 Volts caught fire while they were being crash tested by the GOVERNMENT.....the scared even Lord Obama !!! ROLF

Compared to thousands of gasoline cars burning up.

If I was your eco-buddy Manny I would be screaming PROVE IT....I don't believe YOU !! But I don't really care, since i know you pulled it out of a dark place ....and so do you .....hugs and Kisses !!!

 

And they produced the Cruz....a truly great gasoline car. The difference is they knew the market for the Cruz...Lord Obama ORDERED them to produce the Volt with (currently) $112,000 per car of OUR money.....

1.....2......3.......Thank You Lord Obama !!!

 

When I point out that your side autobabbles hysterical idiocy when the topic is the Volt, you should probably refrain from so loudly confirming my point. And that's just a subset of the way your side autobabbles hysterical idiocy on any environmental/scientific topic.

No problem. We know sources are always a problem for you, but they're never a problem for us.

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/vehicleexecsum.pdf

---
In 2003-2007, U.S. fire departments responded to an average of 287,000 vehicle fires per year.
---

This is one reason why it's good to be a liberal. Since reality has such a strong liberal bias, we can just state the facts, and thus don't get tangled up trying to remember which lies we told.

Anyways, how do you explain the way you were so totally wrong in your predictions of burning Volts?

 

The Three Gorges dam is causing massive problems with relocating the one and a half million people it displaced, the landslides it is causing, the change to water tables, and not even correcting the changeable flow of the Yangtse. I can see how America would want to build one of those...

 

You can only imagine what would happen if a "Three Gorges" style dam were proposed that would require "Elmer Fudd" and his buddies to relocate. He and his buddies would launch a "property rights" lawsuit against the government so fast that your head would spin...

That being said, pretty much all of the economically-feasible (and quite a few non-economically-feasible) dam sites in the USA already have dams.

The "Three Gorges" dam is a perfect example of just the sort of "big government" program that Fudd and Co. like to b*tch and complain about.

And consider this -- who provided funding for the Three Gorges dam? Private investors? H*ll no! Commies funded it! So I guess that makes Fudd a Commie. I'd better call the Department of Homeland Security.

 

No problem. We know sources are always a problem for you, but they're never a problem for us.
Who is "us"?....are there more than one of you in there?


In 2003-2007, U.S. fire departments responded to an average of 287,000 vehicle fires per year.

You are showing a 3rd grade concept of statistics. You cannot quote absolute numbers of populations that vary so much in size. (meaning, there are millions and millions of gas powered cars and only a handful of volts. Show me how often gas powered cars burst into flames during NHTSA tests.......has there ever been THREE of the same model do that before??

When I point out that your side autobabbles hysterical idiocy when the topic is the Volt, you should probably refrain from so loudly confirming my point. And that's just a subset of the way your side autobabbles hysterical idiocy on any environmental/scientific topic.

What on earth are you trying to say?...{tsk tsk, read the rules...no personal attacks}

 

You show quite a talent here for evading the point that zero Chevy Volts have gone up in flames on the road, despite your loud and certain predictions that they were all going to burn after any crash. You were just wrong. Doesn't matter how much you yell, you were still completely wrong.

You see, an amazing thing happened after the crash tests. Chevy investigated and ... fixed the problem. I can see how this boggles you, someone actually fixing a problem instead of just trying to bluster their way through it and blame someone else, but that's actually how responsible people act. You need to hang out with more such people, instead of with the FOX News crowd.

 

Good - then you will not believe us when we tell you it is dangerous and can damage lungs

 

...and just what do you know about the subject beyond some trite slogans you saw on the Internet?

 

I know a project like that would produce massive taxation and regulation.

 

The Cruze is the only vehicle I refuse as a rental. It rides like a bleacher and winds up slower than an old Mercedes non-turbo diesel. Blech.

 

America just can't seem to do big things anymore.

 

Nox is used here in ICU's as a pulmonary vasodilator and we have have to be bloody careful with the (*)(*)(*)(*) stuff!!

 

Possibly because so many right wingers stand around saying "keep the government small and out of my back pocket" which sort of defeats the ability to raise funds for major projects

 

You really don't want to say that to someone who works with the stuff.



Oops! Too late!

 

I suspect what you use is nitrous oxide N2O.

NOx is a shorthand for the soup of oxides of nitrogen formed from the reaction of oxygen and nitrogen in the presence of a suitably hot surface.

EPA regulations specifically and explicitly EXCLUDE N2O from their definition of "NOx."

Don't they teach chemistry in Europe?