I would agree with your sentiments in the case of a TV aerial or radio mast or a quarry, but when it comes to clean power I throw out all considerations. The planet and the environment come first. Plain and simple.
If the evidence of damage to the peat (itself only 3000 years old and a recent invader to these parts) was being damaged by turbines was strong enough then I would be against them, because the environmental damage caused <i>might</i> just outway the good they will do.
Reply | with quote | Posted by FourWinds 2nd January 2005ce 08:48 |
Sleeping Beauty (pixie1948, Jan 01, 2005, 17:08)- Re: Sleeping Beauty - This Might Help (treaclechops, Jan 01, 2005, 17:52)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (FourWinds, Jan 01, 2005, 19:53)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (suave harv, Jan 01, 2005, 20:01)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (nigelswift, Jan 01, 2005, 20:14)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (smallblueplanet, Jan 01, 2005, 20:28)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (smallblueplanet, Jan 01, 2005, 22:41)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (BrigantesNation, Jan 02, 2005, 11:13)
- Re: Devastation in pictures (smallblueplanet, Jan 01, 2005, 23:51)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (Littlestone, Jan 05, 2005, 20:54)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (FourWinds, Jun 16, 2006, 10:37)
- Re: Sleeping Beauty (geniet, Jun 21, 2006, 17:15)
|
|