Hello my friends,
There has been a lot of commentary about the environmental consequences of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The media always carries sad pictures of oil soaked wild life with the stories. What gets missed in the coverage of the spill is that all human endeavors generate some negatives. Here’s an example of an unintended consequence of wind turbines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwVz5hdAMGU
Your thoughts?
Do the initials BP stand for Behemoth Polluter? Did we learn anything
from the Exxon Valdez incident? The first chemical symbol I learned as
a child was H20. I am not a scientist but as children, most of us knew
that the ocean was predominantly two parts hydrogen and one part
oxygen. In high school chemistry we did an experiment using
electricity to separate the hydrogen and oxygen gas from water. Could
we use solar or wind generated electricity to make hydrogen?
A scientist told me recently that hydrogen is the most abundant gas in
the world. It is in the air we breathe, our rivers, lakes and oceans.
Ironic isn’t it?
Technology exists to use hydrogen as a fuel source; the byproduct from
burning it is fresh water. Could the world use more fresh water? Could
the largest source of energy actually be the water and not the dirty
oil that is hidden under it?
Octave Chanute, a civil engineer, wrote in the early 1900s (and told
Orville Wright) that manned flight was impossible. So is using
hydrogen gas in our vehicles daily (a gas that is more stable than
gasoline in its vaporous state) an impossible task?
Your comment and attached link made me chuckle. That you make ANY comparison to a solitary bird wandering into a wind turbine to the thousands, millions and perhaps billions of living creatures killed, maimed and injured by the Gulf oil spill is testament to your narrow vision of the planet.
You apparently view the Earth as an endless vista of investment possibilities – damn the consequences. I have long thought you are heavily invested in oil on some level(s) because of your consistently apologist attitudes toward the industry and its failings. In the interest of fairness as a financial reporter you should disclose your areas of personal financial interest. Meantime, I find your reportage less than objective and therefore meaningless.
As a parent you are invested in providing your young daughter with a good financial future. Some day you may realize the kind of future you are leaving her – one soaked in oil and pollution and poisoned by rampant industrialization and attitudes of “profit at any cost”.
Capitalism is not the evil here. It is the rampant, unfettered exploitation of all and any for the purpose of capitalist pursuits. “Happy Capitalism” by your definition is oxymoronic. Your version of capitalism is not happy at all. It is cut-throat, resistant to common sense and devoid of forethought. What good is a bright financial future for your daughter and her cohort if the planet they inherit is no longer worth living on? Happy Capitalism, Lou. And I mean it.