Renewable Energy Commercialization

"Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene"

Maybe they don't cause cancer rlm. I'll give you that but I think you're a lot smarter than to just dismiss the article.

Are benzene, chlorotorm, touene and xylene good for the respitory system to your knowledge?

Are elevated levels of methane, butane and propane good for you?

Hell, they "scent" propane due to health hazards.

So you're cool with fracking unless it's near you?

 

I've noticed that as well. The air here is pretty good, due to where the winds blow in from (Canada), and is way better than in the cities. I've gone through Chicago a couple of times, but Gary really disturbed me. It looks like hell on Earth from the highway, with all the industrial pollution, and I pitied those downwind.

People get used to it, for the most part, but a trip up here, with the area's cleaner air, allows them to notice just how nasty the air is back home in the city.

How much that affects their temperament is debatable, since traffic is probably the driving force behind their rudeness, but I'd have to say it doesn't help. Subconsciously it has to affect people's moods. Health-wise, it definitely does.

Oh, shoveled off part of my bosses roof today. It was two feet thick in one area. Most of the snow on the ground is melting now though. Good thing I repaired my boots when I did, otherwise me tootsies would have been soaked from all the slush lol

I mention that in case you're one of those cheap bastards who put quarters down the local ladies panties in the bar. Dollar bills, please....you cheap bastards! ...But also to bring up another point: The lake is reportedly the warmest it's even been (on record anyway) and so record snowfall is a possibility.

Bring bills next time.

 

Another example of misinformation. They scent propane (as well as methane, ethane, and butane) because they are odorless (or nearly so) and extremely flammable. The only way either of them will kill you is to be burned alive or suffocate because they will displace the oxygen. None of them are carcinogenic.

 

I stand corrected.

Still rlm, would you be good with elevated levels of these gases in your air?

How about chlorine, benzene etc.?

Personally, I would have a problem with it.

 

You missed my point. When they are lying about 3 different items (that I quickly found), what makes me believe that they are not lying about everything else? BTW, when you are sitting over petroleum reserves, the tend to leak into the atmosphere - naturally. So if they are drilling in your neighborhood, I would expect your levels to have been elevated before they drilled.

 

One thing I have noticed here in London is the increase in the number of wind turbines along the river Thames as well as smaller ones on buildings in the city, plus the number of homes that now have solar panels on the roofs (we are considering it as well)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/14/razor-tower-wind-turbines

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3303

And this one very near to me

http://arthurpewtysmaggotsandwich.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/erith-gets-wind-turbine.html

 

I live in what is considered to be a tourist area, for it's wilderness (outdoor recreation) and scenic vistas. While I personally wouldn't care if those vistas were interrupted by wind turbines here, there, and everywhere, I can understand the concept of keeping National Parks like the Grand Canyon free of them. It's a hard sell in some areas like mine.

 

Actually I think you missed my point by not reading the article rlm.

At no point did they blame cow's tails falling off due to methane, butane etc. You formed that in your head (it seems to me) because that's what you "wanted" it to say.

Heck your first response was this.

Actually, I don't see anywhere in the article referring to methane, butane and propane as associated with cancer for that matter.
As a sidenote, yes, I actually DID know that cow farts produce a hell of a lot of methane.

Do me a favor rlm. Read the entire article.
In my opinion you made a rash judgement on this "propaganda".
In my opinion you're smarter than that.

Like I said read the article and then tell me why you would have absolutely no concern if you were in the situation some farmers seem to be in. And yes, many did it for the money.

I read it in it's entirety and believe me I would be leery of eating that beef or drinking that water amongst other things.

 

Again, methane, propane, and butane are not associated with cancer!

BTW, as if it needs another strike, show me her references. Funny, but there is not one listed.

 

"Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene—compounds associated with drilling and fracking, and also with cancers, birth defects and organ damage."

Show me where methane, propane and butane are the specific agents associated with cancers?

You seem like you're afraid to even consider reading the entire article.

Why is that?

 

Come on! That is exactly what that line you quoted says.

And again I do not read unsupported propaganda. BTW, when they frack, they pump liquid through a pipe that absolutely does not leak - deep into the ground at like 10,000 feet or so and I believe those gas wells are significantly deeper. So this has got to leak through 2 miles of solid rock that has kept the petroleum down there for millions of years. Interesting theory, but ......

 

Please explain how you came to this conclusion.

You have keyed on the words ending in ane and immediately tied it to the cancer causing part of the paragraph.

Your refusal to even consider reading the entire article is something I would expect from some here but not from you.

Seriously. What are you afraid of? If it's ALL unsupported propaganda then read it and explain why. Should be simple in theory.
You've taken the time to evade my questions after all so what's a few more minutes?

Tis a rather pathetic approach you're taking here amigo.

 

The is what it says. That is what most people read. It is a lie. They are writing the article with an agenda and not one whit of science. If I told you that the Great Lakes were a sewer in the 1950's, that would be a fact (that I could document). Since the 1950's, the lakes have returned to reasonably clean. That would also be a fact (that I could document). Also, since the 1950's, the average temperature on earth has warmed i.e. global warming. That would also be a fact (that I could document). Therefore, global warming has cleaned up the Great Lakes. OOPS! Now I have interjected an unsupported opinion. That is how people spread there mantras and unknowing people believe them. That is what your article is doing. Sorry, but it ends here.

 

I used to believe they were being silly, and simply arguing for political purposes, now I'm not so sure.

I've come to realize over the last year or so that it's probably a mass-psychological disorder, one where they can not see reality for what it is. Instead, they see it as they wish to see it, due to the utter hatred they have for Democrats. That in turn is driven by their tendency to live in fear of everything not like themselves.

 

Really? And you know this how?

Damn shame rlm. Instead of actually reading further you took the.......

"I'll put my fingers in my ears and say lalalalalalala I'm not listening" approach.

Anyone want to read this?

http://www.ehow.co.uk/list_5919157_effects-breathing-methane-gas.html

It concerns affects of methane which could involve organ damage. Imagine that.

Benzene is considered a cancer causing agent however. Amongst other things.
Imagine that.

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/benzene/basics/facts.asp


"lalalalalalalala I'm not listening!"

I'm already imagining that.

 

Ignore it. Fear it. Then spread the fear and panic about things you ignore?

How extraordinarily illogical.

 

Exactly. The only logical conclusions that any sane person would consider are that, either this is deliberate, or it's pathological.

For a very long time I refused to believe it could possibly be pathological. I simply couldn't allow myself to consider it as anything other than a difference of opinion.

However, it's clear to me now that illogical beliefs play a big part in the pathology, and that disturbs me, since it's very hard to convince people who are firmly entrenched in illogical beliefs that their beliefs are wrong.

Worse, this is a mass delusion, a self-imposed one at that. It's very difficult for me to accept that mass numbers of people refuse to be rational, or even reasonable, but the evidence is everywhere and I can't ignore it anymore, the repercussions are too severe.

 

Sorry, but that is exactly what I said it would do.

 

No.

You immediately tied it to cancer for the sake of non argument even though organ damage was one of the listed dangers.

Sorry.

lalalalalalalalala

 

His running in circles chasing his own tail grasping on to tangentially related non-issues is why I just ignore him or tease him endlessly. He has no interest in a serious conversation and simply wastes my time, not that this place isn't a waste of time anyway, but when you run into someone that has such a ego-based personal attachment to the ideologies that he pontificates on that he simply can't consider reasonable dialogue. The Us vs Them attitude is entertaining occasionally but gets old when you begin to be able to predict every single response. I guess that is the long way of saying that I find him to be just a boring old white wheelchair jockey pissed off at everyone else for his own situation.

P.S. I'm still waiting for him to update his avatar. I'm getting a little impatient damn it!