Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
3 days ago.
by slinky
BeRight
#1

CLEAN... ENERGY

Offshore wind farms from New Jersey to Virginia took a big step closer to reality with the completion of a review that showed the renewable energy source would not cause major environmental damage, officials said today. Wind projects off the coasts of Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, and New Jersey are being studied. The Mid-Atlantic lease proposal follows the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts that was given the go-ahead in 2010 after 9 years of federal review."No developer should have to wait nine or 10 years," for approval, Salazar said. The response from the developers was "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"

 
 

Member Comments

absolem

forgot to mention that our closed factories have become high-priced condo's. the left-over sweet smell of the products in your condo raises the value and cost.

Posted 106 days ago.

absolem

"In 2014 the trademark, name and logo, which were expired, were acquired by a Youngstown native and resident. The company currently operates under the Youngstown Sheet and Tube name at the address ****sheetandtube****. The company promotes economic redevelopment in Youngstown, and has partnerships with local manufacturers. It currently has an online shop where people can purchase apparel and consumer goods, and has a long term plan of opening up its own factory in the Youngstown area."

Harry, is this what become of our defunct manufacturing heritage? selling apparel to fund redevelopment(??????).

Posted 106 days ago.

absolem

Harry...you are right. we need to effect a change in leadership should we desire a different outcome on any national level and energy production ranks pretty high on the importance scale. indeed we live in a much different world with a much different mind-set of several organized terrorist organizations that perpetrate the majority of the mass senseless killings besides our own lone-gunmen scenarios we unfortunately have to endure here.

Posted 107 days ago.

harryanderson

Yeah. It has risks. I worry about a terrorist or missile attack on a nuclear facility. Wind and solar are definitely better.

Still, I think we refused to even consider nuclear for years because of politics.

Posted 107 days ago.

absolem

Harry... the concerning part of the equation, to me, is that although the United States reduces its potential chance of a nuclear disaster, those in the world continue to utilize and advance their use of nuclear. we are only as safe with our reduction as our neigbors are with their their expansion. Political pressure comes as a result of public education, por/con and the influence of monetary contributors. the sheer nature of the world allows for others mistakes to affect us as we have witnessed with the flow of radioactive waste traveling across the pacific from one accident half-way around the world. the flow of air that carried the results of the tragedy of Chernobyl. unless the world as a whole steps up to eliminate the use of nuclear will we be radioactive-neutral.

Posted 107 days ago.

harryanderson

Yeah. Nuclear carries technological challenges, that's for sure. Political challenges, also.

The development of both nuclear and green energy face political challenges.

Posted 107 days ago.

absolem

removal of the waste is paramount to any decision regarding nuclear. in addition, with the fact of having many new nuclear facilities being built worldwide, nuclear is going to be here for a while.

Posted 107 days ago.

absolem

good morning Harry and thanks for your reply. i have been trying to move away from nuclear power since it seemed until this morning that the overall risks outweighed the benefits. catatrophic loss of life or cost-effective and sustainable power. i read an article from MIT about the development of Molten Salt Reactors. a company is seeking venture funding for the project. it was reported that the Chinese is investing over $350 million over five years and plan on having one built by 2020. from what little i have read, it appears this design is much more cost effective and addresses the over-heating issue that caused the failure at ***ushima. the one issue that was not dealt with was the disposal of any fuel rods, spent or otherwise. i guess when one considers the choice of hydro-electric or geothermal, we run the risk of a man-made natural disater verses a man-made non-natural disater....as the enormous realease of radioactive poisons into the air is not natural. the safety and removel

Posted 107 days ago.

harryanderson

I'd like to develop more nuclear power.

Unfortunately, politics killed American nuclear power after Three Mile Island.

Posted 108 days ago.

absolem

that is nice to know should an arm's length not separate us.... Harry, a quick question if you will..have you ever considered what the most viable non-carbon power source would replace any exiting carbon-based fuels in your immediate community/city? if not, then i would like for you to ponder, if you please, the question and let me know what your idea would be and what woould make it financially viable as well as consistant.

Posted 108 days ago.

harryanderson

Absolem,

I'm more polite within arm's length. Too old for busted knuckles and jaws. ??

Posted 108 days ago.

harryanderson

Absolem,

I'm more polite within arm's length. Too old for busted knuckles and jaws. ??

Posted 108 days ago.

absolem

harryanderson

i would like to compliment you for being polite and a good conversationalist...so far in pixel form that is. i've got to bolt for a bit....enjoy your afternoon.

Posted 108 days ago.

harryanderson

Absolem,

For helping me with my accuracy

Posted 108 days ago.

harryanderson

Coaluser,

That's a good point that's worthy of factoring in. Coal is easily and cheaply stored, among its other benefits. I don't know if this characteristic can reverse its decline. Charles Powell, the President of Appalachian Power, seems to think not.

Posted 109 days ago.

absolem

Oops....wrong topic coaluser...

Posted 109 days ago.

absolem

Coaluser.....????????

Posted 109 days ago.

harryanderson

1. I know about losing one's livelihood, too. My family depended on Youngstown Sheet and Tube. When they scrapped the Jenny, they scrapped our lives.

2. Of course I prefer a cleaner environment. I think everyone, even the worst polluters, prefer a cleaner environment.

3. Call my statement opinion, or extrapolation, or whatever you like. You said you think it's true, and that's good enough for me. No sense standing in the garden waiting for next summer's volunteers to pop up. Let's move on.

Posted 109 days ago.

Coaluser

There are a few good reasons for depending on coal. You cannot look out the window of a natural gas generating plant and tell how many days of fuel you have in storage like you can a coal pile. And most importantly, if someone who is committed to blowing up a 36 inch gas main pipeline like say oh ISIS, Al Qaida, Taliban, Russia, Korea, China take your pick, we will be in the dark for a few months. And I wont even have enough power from the grid to get on this computer and tell you all I TOLD YOU SO...

Posted 109 days ago.

absolem

It is sad when the loss of an industry affects such a large number of people and communities. I am no stranger to its occurrence. My heart goes out to those affected.

Posted 109 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or