Comments for Lights on Oregon

Comment on LNG terminal good for Oregon, nation by Matt

Matt — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:16:12 +0000

You guys are communist.

Comment on Summing it All Up by Matt

Matt — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:13:06 +0000

I guess NorthWest Natural is having financial problems and can’t afford to sponsor this website. Oh well. I can always get Kool-Aid at Wal-Mart.
Goodby Property-Stealing Liberals!

Comment on Summing it All Up by Tuck

Tuck — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 03:20:45 +0000

I want to echo the sentiments of the other authors. I will sorely miss the regular updates! I wish Lights On Oregon well!

Comment on Summing it All Up by Bill

Bill — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:03:36 +0000

I am a regular reader though I have never commented before. I want to congratulate Lights On Oregon on your excellent blog. I have always found the articles clearly written, intellectual, interesting, and most of all helpful. They have provided me with the information I need to communicate with my friends why radical environmentalism is not the answer. I will miss seeing the regular updates.

Perhaps they will start up again at a future date?

Comment on Summing it All Up by Joan

Joan — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 19:06:10 +0000

I have thoroughly enjoyed your thoughtful and accurate posts, especially regarding the LNG issue. Thank you, and I hope that you will resume soon.

Comment on Groups join forces to fight LNG terminal by Kirk W. Fraser

Kirk W. Fraser — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:48:31 +0000

LNG should stay out at sea. Put a terminal in the offshore drilling zone and leave the dangers, annoyances, and stress there instead of bringing them up the Columbia River. We don’t need a Coast Guard gunboat escort on the Columbia delaying other marine traffic. We don’t need risk of a gas cloud escaping then suffocating or exploding miles from the leak. We don’t need pipelines reducing the Columbia’s dredging depth, farmland rights, and disturbing existing parks, wildlife refuge lands, and salmon habitat.

BTW, since it’s mostly for California, have you tried sending it up their Sacramento River or some other place that’s closer to the gas users? Or selling it in the region of the world that produces it so we can have more market for our own energy supplies?

Comment on Waves Could Power the World 2X Over by Combat Chuck

Combat Chuck — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:00:00 +0000

Hey Dick,

Do you mind if I dump my spent fuel rods in your backyard?

Thought you might.

Without treatment for the used rods (and I don’t mean burying them in a concrete box that may or may not be leaking into the watershed) nuclear technology is not sustainable. Not to mention the risk of meltdown, terrorist attack, untrained or poorly trained workers (which will happen, look at how corporations run, especially overseas where regs are lax), and poor maintenance issues (again, would you want to hop on Air Zimbabwe’s DC10 with 3 paint schemes?) Look at it reasonably and you will see that no single power generation method will suffice. We need to diversify our options, that way you do not have all your eggs in same basket.

Personally, I do not like this technology. I do not think it will be feasible for a significant amount of energy for the public sector to be drawn in this manner, but for a military installation to generate their own power at little cost after initial investment, sure, lets give it a go, anything to break our dependence on oil. If someone has the investment capital and would like to build one AFTER having an environmental impact evaluation, then they should feel free.

As to the coal issue, we have so many years worth of it that it doesn’t make sense to just stop using it like Obama wants. What needs to be done is clean coal plants that use algae-production for biofuel as a filter for their air. The algae thrive on the CO2 put out by coal plants and manufacturing plants, and on an acre can produce 20k barrels a year of oil in a closed loop vertical system. Not bad compared to soy, corn, or any other alt fuel source, and operating cost after installation is next to nothing because the emissions are free, plus you have enough oil to make biodiesel for all your company vehicles or to sell.

Diversity and innovation are the solutions.

Comment on Waves Could Power the World 2X Over by Richard Kulisz

Richard Kulisz — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 03:54:43 +0000

This technology will never be deployed on a wide scale because it is retarded. You’re talking about putting things in salt water, in the phototrophic zone no less. So it’ll be rusted and overgrown with seaweed in no time. And as if that weren’t enough, the “power the world 2x over” is a bunch of crap. If they’re using standard Green lies then they’re including the entire fucking ocean, not just shorelines. And in any case, 2x current electric generation means only 10% of what we need to lift everyone out of poverty and account for expected population growth. Who gives a shit about this? Oh yeah, propagandists and lobbyists.

There’s only one technology that can reduce dependence on fossil fuels, nuclear. It’s proven. So proven that coal companies hate it. Think about that.

Comment on Environmentalists vs. Alternative Energy by Gavelect

Gavelect — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:21:26 +0000

I think the rise in business electricity prices is having a terrible effect on all sorts of company’s “along with the credit crunch” although there is still some good deals out there someone somewhere has to do something.

Comment on Lights on Oregon Blog: A Look Back At the Power of Wind by phidda

phidda — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:56:28 +0000

Agreed, but how much of the wind power generated in Oregon is being shipped to California in order to allow the utility companies there meet their renewable requirements.