Texas bans fracking bans

[Better Day 5,766]

​

​

​Fine. we can all give up plastics, shingles, asphalt, cheap fertilizers, effective pesticides when were not allowed to extract oil anymore

 

When will environmentalists learn to work with companies and people into minimizing damage of things rather than trying to stop every single project you can think of?

 

Environmentalists are so unreasonable and so fanatic and unrealistic that a few years ago i decided i just wasnt gonna take them seriously anymore period. When you go to extremes and want your way on everything and cant compromise, it backfires!!!!!

 I am sorry if I care about keeping the earth for future generations. 

Fracking is too dangerous in practise. Why would you think it is a justified practise? 

For example the chemicals leaked it could poison water supplies destroying water which we use for life. It also could cause tremors which would destroy houses and ruin lives. The chemicals could cause cancer within people. 

Is money really more important than human beings? Money is a disgraceful thing. What us enviromentalists want is too keep this earth for future generations. I just hate the methods capitalists go to get money even possibily destroying their OWN water supply. 

This is why I hate capitalism. Essentially it causes degradeful behaviour towards human beings. Don't go on tellling capitalism is a justified system because it is no. We need equality rather than elite stealing off of the poor. 

[Sugarfall 3,723]

I hate when money comes above human life. We need to turn socialist... Everywhere

​It's a cute idea but we've seen it doesn't work at all because people are selfish and that's a fact

[Better Day 5,766]

​It's a cute idea but we've seen it doesn't work at all because people are selfish and that's a fact

I am still a socialist, still a marxist

[field 98]

​What did you use to post this comment ^^^^^?  

Consider all the 'irreparably' damaging production that went into those products.   They would not exist without petroleum. 

Saying there are alternative ways to build them is true, but their development and invention likely would not have happened if the 'save the earth' movement made more sense 100 years ago. 

Look at the 'Mennonites' ... Perfectly 'green' living ... most advanced tech = horse and buggy....8-)

​Absolutely true. And I'm trying to minimise my involvement to what I really feel I need, rather than simply want, because it is still produced unsustainably. But that's a process, not a position in a moral hierarchy.

I wasn't arguing that there's something inherently wrong with us having made these amazing achievements in technology through the use of fossil fuels. We just can't continue with that, we need to be looking forward and not stay locked into our current means of production. If it can't be sustained in the long-term, it doesn't seem to me like an actual advancement, just a short-term high.

Having said all that, I don't see anything inferior about the way of life you've given as an example...

[Economy 52,861]

​Those pesky environmentalists trying to stop irreparable damage to the planet.

You seem to think environmentalists are only 'antis', and that's just not true. There are  thousands of people out there working on energy descent, and putting in place projects and systems using renewable resources and sustainable technology, and all they are lacking is the investment, not the viability.

Why should we tolerate completely destructive, unsustainable practices when we know there are alternatives out there that work?

Your totally missing my point. I never said we shouldnt work towards being greener... However u gotta be smart about how you do it and pick ur battles wisely

 

some environmentalists automatically discount any project. They stand in front of trucks like brainless atomotoms and wont even discuss ways to co promise

 

u cant just suddeny stop everything even remotely environmentally damaging. We still need oil and the transition is slow...

 

Here in Ontario they taking green energy seriously. Nuclear and hydro electricity make up most of our power. But with few locations left for dam building and reluctance for nuclear, they arent building much more of that... At the same time ppl wanna close down coal and gas plants... They plan to replace it with wind and solar...

 

It only makes up 4% of our electricity and these investments already trippled our hydro rates in last 10 years. And due to rise another 40% by 2018 just to raise the percentage to 12% by 2020

 

Its a slow expensive transition thats already putting financial pressure on families and driving away business. U cant just shut off fossil fuels from one day to the next.

 

Also ppl seem to forget oil isnt just energy and fuelig cars. The list of oil products are endless... Not all have alternatives in existance...

 

Efforts should be made on research to improve recycling technologies and continuing to make renewables cheaper. In essance innovation

 

U gotta make oil obselete before trying to get rid of it... Other wise u just cause economic damage, you clash with corporations and dont end up achieving much

 

environmentaliss also gotta reason about how some things backfire. For instance nobody wants to build pipelines... Now oil by rail is booming conjesting other products, and causing more CO2 to transport seeing as its a less efficient transport method. And they were warned about that but were too close minded to even consider it

 

u wanna save environment? Use your brain and be smart about how u do it, dont use emotional determination that makes u irrational. Most devoted environmentalists thats how i view them  

 

their cause may be a good cause, but they dont know how to go about it in an effective way. Just non-sense  

[Economy 52,861]

 I am sorry if I care about keeping the earth for future generations. 

Fracking is too dangerous in practise. Why would you think it is a justified practise? 

For example the chemicals leaked it could poison water supplies destroying water which we use for life. It also could cause tremors which would destroy houses and ruin lives. The chemicals could cause cancer within people. 

Is money really more important than human beings? Money is a disgraceful thing. What us enviromentalists want is too keep this earth for future generations. I just hate the methods capitalists go to get money even possibily destroying their OWN water supply. 

This is why I hate capitalism. Essentially it causes degradeful behaviour towards human beings. Don't go on tellling capitalism is a justified system because it is no. We need equality rather than elite stealing off of the poor. 

First of all, environmentalists always talk about concerns as facts or exagerate the evidence. Those tremors it causes are small, would never destroy houses... Also those chemicals generally go so deep that many experts dont even believe it will actually contaminate water supply. 

 

But even if those concerns were as true to the level environmentalists claim (which may or may not be), your still missing my point

 

my point is we need resources and the best way to minimize environmental damage is to do 2 things

 

#1 innovate. Putting pressure on governemts to fund more for research and stuff to make renewables more reliable and economical. I live in an area with little wind and short sun hours in winter and environmentalists exepct us to make electricity out of this? U gotta be realistic and come up with solutions!!!

 

#2 work and compromise with industries. TransCanada for instance was willig to work out pipeline saftety enhancements for keystone with the latest technology and possibly altering some routes. Environmentalists couldnt compromise to anythig so now were carrying oil by rail which in many ways is worse. Now nobody won

 

u gotta use ur brain and be innovative not stand in frot of every truck and try to stop everything  

[Better Day 5,766]

First of all, environmentalists always talk about concerns as facts or exagerate the evidence. Those tremors it causes are small, would never destroy houses... Also those chemicals generally go so deep that many experts dont even believe it will actually contaminate water supply. 

 

But even if those concerns were as true to the level environmentalists claim (which may or may not be), your still missing my point

 

my point is we need resources and the best way to minimize environmental damage is to do 2 things

 

#1 innovate. Putting pressure on governemts to fund more for research and stuff to make renewables more reliable and economical. I live in an area with little wind and short sun hours in winter and environmentalists exepct us to make electricity out of this? U gotta be realistic and come up with solutions!!!

 

#2 work and compromise with industries. TransCanada for instance was willig to work out pipeline saftety enhancements for keystone with the latest technology and possibly altering some routes. Environmentalists couldnt compromise to anythig so now were carrying oil by rail which in many ways is worse. Now nobody won

 

u gotta use ur brain and be innovative not stand in frot of every truck and try to stop everything  

You are missing the whole point of my argument. Why are you rating money above human beings? Surely humans mean more than a few billion of pounds. This is why I hate capitalism with all of my gut mainly they don't care about human beings all they care about is themselves. 

I actually hate the invention of money because it is one of the 3 reasons why they are war (the other two being power and religion). 

 

These "experts" which are employed by the greedy energy companies to try and claim tha fracking is a safe practise which in fact it would completely ruin this planet for the future generations. Why are you supporting fracking when it has been prove it does more damage than good. 

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

​Absolutely true. And I'm trying to minimise my involvement to what I really feel I need, rather than simply want, because it is still produced unsustainably. But that's a process, not a position in a moral hierarchy.

I wasn't arguing that there's something inherently wrong with us having made these amazing achievements in technology through the use of fossil fuels. We just can't continue with that, we need to be looking forward and not stay locked into our current means of production. If it can't be sustained in the long-term, it doesn't seem to me like an actual advancement, just a short-term high.

Having said all that, I don't see anything inferior about the way of life you've given as an example...

​Either do I.  But consider that their life style exists because of superior military technology.  Don't think for a minute that IS like factions and warlords would land and conquer anyone they feel is weaker than them.  

What I agree with regarding the environmental ideology is to use the "harmful" resources to develop and integrate earth friendly methods into keeping our lifestyle permanent for future generations. 

[Economy 52,861]

You are missing the whole point of my argument. Why are you rating money above human beings? Surely humans mean more than a few billion of pounds. This is why I hate capitalism with all of my gut mainly they don't care about human beings all they care about is themselves. 

I actually hate the invention of money because it is one of the 3 reasons why they are war (the other two being power and religion). 

 

These "experts" which are employed by the greedy energy companies to try and claim tha fracking is a safe practise which in fact it would completely ruin this planet for the future generations. Why are you supporting fracking when it has been prove it does more damage than good. 

Ok u hate money... The stuff ur blabering about is basically what u hate about society but ur not offering any real solutions

 

like, from an ethical standpoint, your absolutely right... Money shouldnt be put above people...

 

but then theres reality... And being balanced and realistic, the methods environmentalists are using arent working... And are not very effective

 

ur also missing my point that they are wasting time and energy the wrong way... U cant fight every battle... Would make more sense for environmentalists to focus on things that are more easily workable to get some results. Instead of creating gridlock

 

i also point out i like my hot showers, my computer and y lifestyle... To live a life that would cause no damage to the earth wed have to go back before the industrial revolution. Sorry, im not here for that

[field 98]

but then theres reality... And being balanced and realistic, the methods environmentalists are using arent working

 

i also point out i like my hot showers, my computer and y lifestyle... To live a life that would cause no damage to the earth wed have to go back before the industrial revolution. Sorry, im not here for that

Do you even know about movements like transition towns, ever heard the terms energy descent or permaculture? You really don't seem to know what is actually already happening all over the world, what is working all over the world. You seem to have a very narrow, small view of what environmentalism is. 

I'm not really sure what the point would be now though, to carry on having this conversation, when you've just admitted you value your lifestyle above the planet. 

[Economy 52,861]

Do you even know about movements like transition towns, ever heard the terms energy descent or permaculture? You really don't seem to know what is actually already happening all over the world, what is working all over the world. You seem to have a very narrow, small view of what environmentalism is. 

I'm not really sure what the point would be now though, to carry on having this conversation, when you've just admitted you value your lifestyle above the planet. 

​i know of "transition towns" and some of these innitiatives. But changing entire Countries at the speed some propose is completely unrealistic

 

Secondly dont gimme that bull like im some kind of evil maniac. Im being honest, something most ppl here cant be with themnselves

 

To be totally eco friendly wed have to give up more than many people realize. People say they dont care if its for saving the planet but i say baloney. Few people live the way they need to, to be truly eco friendly, i say most people are hypocrites.

 

U criticising me. But do u take only cold showers? have you or your parent bought a fully electric car? do you use any plastics of any kind ever in stuff you like to buy (not counting things that are considered necessities)? How much effort do u truly put in living non-consumerism?

 

If u answered well to all those questions congrats, ur like like one of less than 1% of ppl in the developed world. The other 99% is mostly comprised of people whop say they support change, but dont make big sacrafices themselves to attain it... they expect the Government to do it... when in reality, to maintain the lifestyle their accustomed to, its hard for the Government to do it

 

Criticise me all u want. I never denied theres problems, im not even saying we shouldnt do anything about it. I merely said people are unrealistic. What did i say that was so off? tell me and maybe i might take u seriously!

[field 98]

​i know of "transition towns" and some of these innitiatives. But changing entire Countries at the speed some propose is completely unrealistic

 

Secondly dont gimme that bull like im some kind of evil maniac. Im being honest, something most ppl here cant be with themnselves

 

To be totally eco friendly wed have to give up more than many people realize. People say they dont care if its for saving the planet but i say baloney. Few people live the way they need to, to be truly eco friendly, i say most people are hypocrites.

 

U criticising me. But do u take only cold showers? have you or your parent bought a fully electric car? do you use any plastics of any kind ever in stuff you like to buy (not counting things that are considered necessities)? How much effort do u truly put in living non-consumerism?

 

If u answered well to all those questions congrats, ur like like one of less than 1% of ppl in the developed world. The other 99% is mostly comprised of people whop say they support change, but dont make big sacrafices themselves to attain it... they expect the Government to do it... when in reality, to maintain the lifestyle their accustomed to, its hard for the Government to do it

 

Criticise me all u want. I never denied theres problems, im not even saying we shouldnt do anything about it. I merely said people are unrealistic. What did i say that was so off? tell me and maybe i might take u seriously!

Look mate, it's a proces, not a state of holier-than-thou purity to achieve. Of course i'm not where I want to be in ecological terms, but I'm trying. My frustration is with the attitude of 'sorry, like my lifestyle too much to change'. 

There are solutions and alternatives out there for all the examples you mentioned though. Power your electric shower by electricity from renewable energy (Good Energy if you're in the UK, people) and where's the problem? No big sacrifice necessary. 

[Economy 52,861]

Look mate, it's a proces, not a state of holier-than-thou purity to achieve. Of course i'm not where I want to be in ecological terms, but I'm trying. My frustration is with the attitude of 'sorry, like my lifestyle too much to change'. 

There are solutions and alternatives out there for all the examples you mentioned though. Power your electric shower by electricity from renewable energy (Good Energy if you're in the UK, people) and where's the problem? No big sacrifice necessary. 

Thats all great. Im just pointing out environmentalists often focus on the wrong thing. Not very organized. Create more dysfunction than anything else

 

I just think it makes so much more sense to push for technologies and development/innovation in ways to make toxic things obsolete... That way not only are solutions simpler, but on top of that there will also be less pressure from the private sector once u give them more economic means of being green

 

trying too hard to stop every manor project from happening and expanding when we need resorces is not very effective. Your creating economic problems when things cant develop, political deadlock, and distrust between both sides of the issue

 

Also sometimes its good to compromise. My way or the highway doesnt work with these things. When companies offer to work on safety and compromize on certain things in return for public support/permits and environmentalists still refuse... They just find more expensive and harmful ways around then nobody wins. Economically we loose, environmentally we loose. Perfect example was the pipelines where now oil by rail causing its own big set of issues that were so unnecessairy

 

I feel like i always get fired on unfairly. I dont like sugar coating things or pertending we live in fairyland. I like to see things for what they are and be realistic rather than what i think they "should be"

 

For the record, I care about the environment too in case u think i dont. But i also are about society and the prosperity weve built. And i believe economy vs environment needs to work together to create a future everyone can benefit.

 

Both sides often arent willing to compromize. Businesses always go after money, and environmentalists often are hard to please. They also dont really always things through, i see that over and over again.

 

Funny thing is tides have turned. Up until not long ago Corporations did everything they wanted and greed got in the way of everything... But now with quick media coverage and younger generation awareness on environmen problems environmentalists have gained a lot of power. Good in one way, but im not sure they really know how to use it effectively half the time. When u go too far, ur ignored. Thats what happened with Transcanada, after a while gave up with talks with ppl trying to come up with compromizes, instead they went for infrastructure alternatives that were worse and nobody won because environmentalists didnt wanna accept any compromises and thought they could stop them but instead the company went for something worse...

 

Money and Corporations are the source of the problem... But whether u wanna admit it or not, many environmentalists when they go to extremes and are impossible to please and make rediculous demands, it may actually be compounding the problem and slowing down change cause the ones on the otherside just see them as terrible enemies out to destroy their businesses and are to be ignored and avoided as much as possible cause u cant work with them.  

[Luc 4,776]

Your totally missing my point. I never said we shouldnt work towards being greener... However u gotta be smart about how you do it and pick ur battles wisely

 

some environmentalists automatically discount any project. They stand in front of trucks like brainless atomotoms and wont even discuss ways to co promise

 

u cant just suddeny stop everything even remotely environmentally damaging. We still need oil and the transition is slow...

 

Here in Ontario they taking green energy seriously. Nuclear and hydro electricity make up most of our power. But with few locations left for dam building and reluctance for nuclear, they arent building much more of that... At the same time ppl wanna close down coal and gas plants... They plan to replace it with wind and solar...

 

It only makes up 4% of our electricity and these investments already trippled our hydro rates in last 10 years. And due to rise another 40% by 2018 just to raise the percentage to 12% by 2020

 

Its a slow expensive transition thats already putting financial pressure on families and driving away business. U cant just shut off fossil fuels from one day to the next.

 

Also ppl seem to forget oil isnt just energy and fuelig cars. The list of oil products are endless... Not all have alternatives in existance...

 

Efforts should be made on research to improve recycling technologies and continuing to make renewables cheaper. In essance innovation

 

U gotta make oil obselete before trying to get rid of it... Other wise u just cause economic damage, you clash with corporations and dont end up achieving much

 

environmentaliss also gotta reason about how some things backfire. For instance nobody wants to build pipelines... Now oil by rail is booming conjesting other products, and causing more CO2 to transport seeing as its a less efficient transport method. And they were warned about that but were too close minded to even consider it

 

u wanna save environment? Use your brain and be smart about how u do it, dont use emotional determination that makes u irrational. Most devoted environmentalists thats how i view them  

 

their cause may be a good cause, but they dont know how to go about it in an effective way. Just non-sense  

You can't say a people take green energy very seriously when wind and solar make up for 4% of total energy. Dams are cheaper than other energy, that's the reason people do it. Nuclear energy is barely green. It takes millions of years for something to not be radioactive anymore.

You need to give more tax benefits to small initiatives, make banks and pension funds invest more in green energy and much more. It's not slow, plankton (making up for 50% to 85% of oxygen production) and coral and other animals react heavily to small temperature differences (0.25° C difference is enough for most to die). Coral riffs are already dying out everywhere. Environmentalists want to make energy and transport 100% green by 2050, to keep the temperature increase below 2° C (3.8° F), which will mean that thousands and thousands of animals producing oxygen and saving up carbon dioxide will become extinct.

[Economy 52,861]

You can't say a people take green energy very seriously when wind and solar make up for 4% of total energy. Dams are cheaper than other energy, that's the reason people do it. Nuclear energy is barely green. It takes millions of years for something to not be radioactive anymore.

You need to give more tax benefits to small initiatives, make banks and pension funds invest more in green energy and much more. It's not slow, plankton (making up for 50% to 85% of oxygen production) and coral and other animals react heavily to small temperature differences (0.25° C difference is enough for most to die). Coral riffs are already dying out everywhere. Environmentalists want to make energy and transport 100% green by 2050, to keep the temperature increase below 2° C (3.8° F), which will mean that thousands and thousands of animals producing oxygen and saving up carbon dioxide will become extinct.

4% cuz the innitiatives are faily new. Also we get little sunlight in winter and little wind most of the time. That form of power is extremely unreliable

Also like most environmentaliss ur ony listing the problems, no real practical affordable solutions or ways of working better with industry