why are Greenpeace always missing the obvious ?

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

example well ok, their stance generally on nuclear power, they don't want it and according to greenpeace the existence of said power stations is a most heinous crime. They are not very happy with blair for saying there should be a new generation of Nuclear power stations built, this despite the fact that we are, quickly, running short of ideas as to how our future energy needs are going to be met. Yet they suggest what as an alternative? Consider that we need forms of generation that can consistently supply a load on the National Grid. Just my take on the situation.

They want to stick a load of wind farms and tidal farms up IIRC.

Nevermind the fact that a massive wind or tidal farm would totally **** up the ecosystem of the area in which you put it....

 

[Jokester]

If it's not about the environment, what is it about? They cannot solely be interested in money as their stated economic aim is to not make any profit.

They have to fund themselves as they run an expensive world wide operation, they do that by doing stunts whether or not it's in the best interest of the environment, as long as it gets publicity.

The case of the Brent Spar comes to mind, it raised a lot of publicity for them but their claims were later rubbished by numerous scientists, though by then it was too late as the government had already committed to the full scale removal of each and every North Sea platform and facility, despite in most case having little or no long term environmental effect. Not that I'm bothered, it's going to keep me in a job until I retire .

Also Greenpeace actively campaign against wind power, not necessarily because of the poor performance of them but becuase they generate noise polution. And the alternative is?

Jokester

 

[Dolph]

You said "ultimately it's not about the environment, it's about making sure they have funds coming in the door" which is obviously not the case. If they were only interested in funds coming in the door they would not be registered as a non-profit organisation; they would be registered as a company.

If it's not about the environment, what is it about? They cannot solely be interested in money as their stated economic aim is to not make any profit.

Power and influence

Doomsday predictions tend to work well for that, as do outright lies (see Brent Spar and greenpeace), anything to keep people in the power....

 

[cymap]

example well ok, their stance generally on nuclear power, they don't want it and according to greenpeace the existence of said power stations is a most heinous crime. They are not very happy with blair for saying there should be a new generation of Nuclear power stations built, this despite the fact that we are, quickly, running short of ideas as to how our future energy needs are going to be met. Yet they suggest what as an alternative? Consider that we need forms of generation that can consistently supply a load on the National Grid. Just my take on the situation.

Erm, 20 seconds on the Greenpeace website got me here:

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/climate/solution/revolution.cfm

So their proposal is a decentralised energy network. There's even a 17 minute video to watch...

 

[Meatball]

I will drink bottled water, sruw you Green Peace. Tap water tastes wierd

 

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

There's even a 17 minute video to watch...

Lol.....hosted on "YouTube". How appropriate.

IMHO Decentrilisation is madness. Who pays for the installation and maintence of the units? The Government? Why would they fork out masses of extra cash when its cheaper for them to issue a contract for a powerstation on the National Grid. would you get the individuals in an area to pay for the individual de-centralised units? Yeah.....you try gettting a family of low lifes or chavs to pay for the installation and upkeep. They'd rather spend the cash on booze.

And what about repairing the decentralised units? Lots of little power generation units will need masses more repair men to maintain and repair than one single power plant.

 

[cymap]

Power and influence

Doomsday predictions tend to work well for that, as do outright lies (see Brent Spar and greenpeace), anything to keep people in the power....

Power? Greenpeace are in power? Really?

 

[cymap]

Also Greenpeace actively campaign against wind power, not necessarily because of the poor performance of them but becuase they generate noise polution. And the alternative is?

Jokester

So when they say things like this:

Wind power is the only clean energy source that can deliver large amounts of power right now.

The UK is the windiest country in Europe. Offshore wind alone, could meet our electricity needs three times over.

Wind power can now produce electricity at a cheaper price than nuclear power in the UK. What’s more, the UK government predicts that onshore wind will be the cheapest form of electricity generation by 2020.

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/climate/solution/wind.cfm

And endorse a site called yes2wind.com, they are against wind power, aren't they.

 

[rmuir]

I stand corrected... to a point. Appealing as the idea of a decentralised energy network may be, it won't happen quickly and certainly not as quickly as would be required to offset the downturn in production that IS going to happen.

Actually been quite clever here because the alternative is appealing but would require wholesale change in the way we generate/consume energy and still doesn't really provide the stability and security of supply that a large power station would.

I will, however, admit that the idea of residential areas generating more of their own energy is something im quite interested in.

 

[Efour]

I dont think we are gonna get a good discussion going here at 11:30pm.

How can anyone really **** off Greepeace?

Read that website watch the video.

It makes perfect sense.

How can people say they shouldnt use cars, or their ships it is the 21st centuary

i know im immature but the mental quality of people here is sometimes so poor.

 

[cymap]

I stand corrected... to a point. Appealing as the idea of a decentralised energy network may be, it won't happen quickly and certainly not as quickly as would be required to offset the downturn in production that IS going to happen.

Actually been quite clever here because the alternative is appealing but would require wholesale change in the way we generate/consume energy and still doesn't really provide the stability and security of supply that a large power station would.

I will, however, admit that the idea of residential areas generating more of their own energy is something im quite interested in.

I would have thought it is quite hard for Greenpeace to persuade people about their ideas when they are rubbished so quickly by so many people...

 

[Jokester]

So when they say things like this:

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/climate/solution/wind.cfm

And endorse a site called yes2wind.com, they are against wind power, aren't they.

Looks like they are a bit fussy about it then when it comes to the crunch.

Jokester

 

[Jokester]

Power? Greenpeace are in power? Really?

They wield substantial power, again Brent Spar incident.

Jokester

 

[Flibster]

Greenpeace...

For once, the French had the right idea.

Simon/~Flibster

 

[cymap]

Looks like they are a bit fussy about it then when it comes to the crunch.

Jokester

I suppose if you think being against one wind farm deployment for specific reasons, i.e. the potential negative effects on a number of rare bird species, is they same as being against wind power as a whole, then I see no point in arguing with you further and will instead go and stick my head in the oven where it will no doubt be better accomodated.

 

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

I suppose if you think being against one wind farm deployment for specific reasons, i.e. the potential negative effects on a number of rare bird species, is they same as being against wind power as a whole, then I see no point in arguing with you further and will instead go and stick my head in the oven where it will no doubt be better accomodated.

No matter where you put a wind farm, its going to affect the local ecosystem . Greenpeace just prefers to turn a blind eye when it suits them.

 

[rmuir]

I would have thought it is quite hard for Greenpeace to persuade people about their ideas when they are rubbished so quickly by so many people...

As nice an idea as that may be, ive done a bit of reading on micro generation, none of it connected with greenpeace, so i knew of and was impressed by the idea prior to my reading of their site.

My dad works at a nuclear power station and has had dealings with greenpeace in the past, all they had to say in either formal meetings or in protests was that nuclear power was dirty and that he should be ashamed for polluting the world. Whenever he has tried to discuss with them the possiblities of a multi source national grid ( nuclear/renewables/gas/microgeneration ) they were not interested, they had their view and everyone else was wrong.

 

[Jokester]

I suppose if you think being against one wind farm deployment for specific reasons, i.e. the potential negative effects on a number of rare bird species, is they same as being against wind power as a whole, then I see no point in arguing with you further and will instead go and stick my head in the oven where it will no doubt be better accomodated.

Any large scale viable wind farm is likely to have an impact on local wildlife...

Jokester

Edit:- Whoops

 

[cymap]

Any large scale viable wind farm is likely to have an impact on local wildlife...

Jokester

I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately for you that is not what we were talking about. You said that "Greenpeace actively campaign against wind power, not necessarily because of the poor performance of them but becuase they generate noise polution. And the alternative is?" which is clearly utter cobblers.

 

[cymap]

No matter where you put a wind farm, its going to affect the local ecosystem . Greenpeace just prefers to turn a blind eye when it suits them.

Maybe they prefer to place wind farms where the local ecosystem does not consist of a number of rare species?