New solar power plants cannot be built for two more years.

[Coldkilla]

Link

DENVER ? Faced with a surge in the number of proposed solar power plants, the federal government has placed a moratorium on new solar projects on public land until it studies their environmental impact, which is expected to take about two years.

WTF? Environmental Impact?

 

[Savij]

Edit: As of 3:53 PM, I'm certain that everyone but 3 people in this thread either did not read the article or failed to fully comprehend it and went with the inflammatory headline instead. You are all fools regardless of your political and environmental views or your views on this issue.

 

[spaceman]

dey blind de birds!

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Yeah, you remember ANWR?

It's ANWR 2.0, because heaven forbid we put a solar power plant someplace where the sun shines and make the wildlife have to walk a few hundred feet around the building....

 

[0roo0roo]

shades the grounds..!

 

[Savij]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Yeah, you remember ANWR?

It's ANWR 2.0, because heaven forbid we put a solar power plant someplace where the sun shines and make the wildlife have to walk a few hundred feet around the building....

heaven forbid we put an apartment building someplace where the sun shines and make the wildlife have to walk a few hundred feet around the building. It certainly would make public lands more accesssible.

Edit: I'm all for solar power, but it's still putting large masses of glass and concrete in public lands could be just as bad as putting a parking garage in public lands.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

WTF

republican gov't helping big oil. What toal BS

 

[sandmanwake]

What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

 

[techs]

You may have forgotten this was done by BUSH administration. Which is so dedicated to environmental protection they won't open emails from their own envrionmental protection agency.
Nope, this is to push nuclear power by screwing the small companies which build solar generation in favor of the big corporations who want to get government subsidies of tens of billions for nuke plants.
After all, why have solar power competing on a fair basis when you can have government subsidized nuclear power?

 

[paulxcook]

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

I for one welcome our new sun sucking overlords.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Well, I can see this issue from a different angle.

Solar Panels DO leave a significant environmental footprint in its development stage.

Also, when they say "public land" I'm going to assume they're thinking of a field of Solar Panels. That wouldn't be "great" for the environment really.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

Suck extra energy from the sun? Dear god I thought I'd heard it all...

 

[BurnItDwn]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

What he says is 100% true and also very serious business.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

What he says is 100% true and also very serious business.

How exactly do they "suck energy from the sun" other than make use in a different way of the energy from the sun already falling on a particular spot?

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

What he says is 100% true and also very serious business.

I read a book once about that - a Tom Clancy novel where [Terrorists] devise a scheme to steal plans for a [giant solar farm] for ransom under the watchful eye of [corrupt Gypsie nationals]. The plot twists when the [Terrorists] [convert the collector to a reflector and aim it at the MOON!] even after their demands are met, unless a [sassy cop with street smarts] can quell his pride long enough to stop the [Terrorists] once and for all. The book ends with an ironic scene in which the [Terrorists] [melt their own faces off].

 

[Gibson486]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

What he says is 100% true and also very serious business.

How exactly do they "suck energy from the sun" other than make use in a different way of the energy from the sun already falling on a particular spot?

I think he means that it attracts energy from the sun, just like how certain colors attract heat more than others.

To say "suck energy" though.....so that thing is a vacuum?

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

Wait, what? There is no sucking involved.

 

[rbV5]

Originally posted by: Gibson486

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

What he says is 100% true and also very serious business.

How exactly do they "suck energy from the sun" other than make use in a different way of the energy from the sun already falling on a particular spot?

I think he means that it attracts energy from the sun, just like how certain colors attract heat more than others.

To say "suck energy" though.....so that thing is a vacuum?

Yes, solar vacuum. Its a huge concern that is mostly overlooked or dismissed...

 

[ElFenix]

everything requires environmental studies. often a big concern is drainage. not to mention the environmental cost of construction and building roads to/from the place. 2 years isn't too bad for wholly new construction out in the boonies. it takes that long to do the environmental impact for putting rails in the middle of an existing street for light rail.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

Yep, it's true. It's a documented fact (currently being hidden by the Bush administration to prevent mass panic) that every black hole in the universe was actually caused by the inhabitants of the various star systems over-using solar collectors. In fact, it's suspected (but not proven) that the Empire's "planet killer" on the DeathStar is actually a massive solar collector focused to suck the light out of a planet, thus causing it's destruction. 😛

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
WTF

republican gov't helping big oil. What toal BS

u mean like when ted kennedy blocked windfarms near his fancy home?

 

[AbAbber2k]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

😕

Fail.

Originally posted by: Pastore
Suck extra energy from the sun? Dear god I thought I'd heard it all...

x2

Originally posted by: paulxcook
I for one welcome our new sun sucking overlords.

The Sun is a murderous rampaging death machine, and it must be stopped. Plus it apparently causes cancer. Cancer bad.

 

[mugs]

How could anyone have thought sandmanwake was serious? :laugh:

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
What people don't realize is that solar panels aren't passive. They actually suck sunlight from the surrounding area and if they're built big enough, they can suck extra energy from the sun, thereby reducing the lifetime of the sun. I know this new regulation sounds like a pain, but it's a small price to pay to keep entire regions from being covered in darkness due to light sucking panels.

Wait, what? There is no sucking involved.

Oh, my God. It's Mega Maid. She's gone from suck to blow.