Greens Protest Taking Them Seriously
Posted by Tom Stelene on September 12, 2008
A new kind of plant that stores carbon underground just opened in Germany.
While some power companies are promoting the technology as a green dream, interestingly many environmental groups are vocally opposing it. Over 99 organizations in a group called the “Climate Alliance” invited protesters to the opening of the plant. They say the technology is too unproven and CO2 separation also lowers plant efficiency to as little as 34 percent, from a typical efficiency of 44 percent. Further, they say it will slow the adoption of alternative energy sources, lulling people into a false sense of security. [bold added]
Environmentalists oppose the carbon storage facility because “the technology is too unproven.” There comes a point, I would think, with at least some types of technologies, that they will have to remain “too unproven” until they can be actually used, employed, and applied in, at least, a restricted sense. After that, if it works, great – push forward with it; if not, then back to the drawing board. That, however, is not what the environmentalists can accept. Because the technology is “too unproven” they want to forbid using it to see if it can be further proven or even disproven. This means: because it is too unproven one cannot try to prove it.
Environmentalists have spent years scaring the world about the harm from too much carbon. They have been demanding we hurry up and develop the needed technology before it is too late. Now they oppose technology that is designed to faithfully serve their god, The Environment. Why? There is only one explanation: they are against technology as such, no matter what its use.
Their twisted minds do not stop there.
This technology causes a problem, they claim. Its use ”will slow the adoption of alternative energy sources.” The technology in question is related to coal. What if their objection is broadened to include other energy sources? If we could create all the technology to accomodate our current energy sources to the standards of eco-purity, that has to also be unacceptable to them.
They have all along wanted “alternative energy sources” to be imposed on us. They could not say that openly, so they said our energy sources are causing numerous problems. Environmentalists were counting on us simply phasing out these allegedly problematic energy sources, not actually solving these problems, be they real or imagined. Now the environmentalists are hysterical because what is not “too unproven” by now is our ability to solve these problems and thus keep using our present energy sources. Talk about being thrown a curve ball!
Environmentalists cannot have it both ways – try though they might. Consider this from ARI’s Greens Against Renewable Energy:
The Bureau of Land Management has reportedly received more than 130 proposals to build solar power plants on federal lands in the Southwest. New transmission lines to carry the power from the sun-baked deserts to places where electricity users actually live are also under consideration.
However, the solar applications are mired in environmental impact studies, which one solar industry executive said “could completely stunt the growth of the industry.” And the plans for new transmission capacity are being ferociously protested by environmentalists decrying the “permanent destruction of hundreds of thousands of acres of pristine public lands.”
According to Dr. Keith Lockitch, resident fellow of the Ayn Rand Center: “This just shows the true objective of green activism. Environmentalists don’t actually want us to find alternative ways of producing energy; they want us to stop using energy altogether.
“The basic premise of environmentalism is to leave nature alone. Capturing and utilizing any source of energy–even ones that are supposedly green and renewable–will necessarily have some impact on nature, and will therefore inevitably be subject to environmentalist attacks and condemnation.
Look at where the environmentalists now stand. They are protesting both the use of new “eco-friendly” technology that they have been calling for, and the use of “eco-friendly” energy that they have also been calling for. Okay, dirt-worshippers, you are caught in a big contradiction of your own making.
I, for one, love seeing this! It looks like your game is up, dirt-worshippers. You can only perpetuate your eco-fraud on people for so long. Eventually reality catches up with it! The deceptions of environmentalism have forced environmentalists to now protest against their claims and ideas being taken seriously; a self-reductio ad absurdum of sorts! Their facade is finally crumbling and about to reveal what is underneath, namely, their vicious, man-hating, dirt-worshipping natures.
If it is any consolation, dirt-worshippers - I never took your claims and ideas seriously. 
Elisheva Levin said
I do not find this to be surprising.
A number of years ago, I worked with the Green Party in my state–I was a biologist at the time, and my specialty was ecology and evolution. (Currently, it is hard for me to use the word “ecologist” to describe my work, because the scientific term has been degraded to mean something quite different and unscientific.)
Working with these people was quite enlightening. They were not really interested in the science–because it often contradicted their ideology.
With respect to the issue of solar collectors in desert ecologies, there is little reason to worry. There are millions of acres of desert, and the species there are sparse but hardy. I suspect that putting in the collectors will cause some disruption, but species adapt in unpredictable ways. And the impact will be small anyway. Deserts are big places!
Tom Stelene said
Thanks for sharing that! It sounds like darn good blog-material from that experience!