firecat: red panda, winking (Default)
[personal profile] firecat
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/

There were 12 entries on the blog yesterday and today. I am pretty impressed by all of them.

(Except the one about how driving the Chevy Volt is "zero emissions". Um, generating the electrical power that comes into your home creates emissions.)

Date: 5 Feb 2009 10:29 pm (UTC)
jenk: Faye (RainInSeattle)
From: [personal profile] jenk
generating the electrical power that comes into your home creates emissions

Really depends on where you're getting your power from. Hydroelectric dams do not burn fossil fuels...some carbon dioxide and methane can be generated by the reservoirs in some climates if there's decaying plant material in them, but it's nothing like a coal plant.

But yes, "zero emissions from the car, emissions from the production of electricity at your home vary" is different from "zero emissions".

(I grew up in Washington, which is to say, with hydroelectric power. Up here, burning fossil fuels to generate electricity is considered silly / stupid / wasteful / damaging - but the environmental damage from the dams is acceptable. It's one of those topics that can divide a room into Native Washingtonians vs Outsiders quite effectively.)

Date: 6 Feb 2009 12:22 am (UTC)
ckd: small blue foam shark (Default)
From: [personal profile] ckd
Well, there's always the nuclear fission option, except for how well that worked in Washington. (If your organization's acronym can be pronounced "whoops", that's a bad sign.)

Date: 6 Feb 2009 01:35 am (UTC)
jenk: Faye (Default)
From: [personal profile] jenk
As if Hanford wasn't already the poster child of How Not To Do Nuclear Anything... ;)

Date: 6 Feb 2009 05:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] micheinnz.livejournal.com
There is no such thing as an environmentally-neutral form of electricity generation.

There are only better and worse options. Which is which depends on the location.

I think it's generally agreed that fossil fuels are to be regarded as a pretty poor option in most places, now.

Date: 6 Feb 2009 12:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] futabachan.livejournal.com
But the emissions from the power plant aren't dumping lots of smog from millions of less efficient little plants all over the city where everyone lives and has to breathe. And a power plant is a single central point attached to an unpopular and deep-pocketed entity that can be put on the hook for cleaning up their act.

And there's also nuclear and hydro; we have a lot of both in Canada. And wind power is coming.

Date: 6 Feb 2009 02:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whumpdotcom.livejournal.com
The "but what about the electricity" is a red herring constantly trotted out by the oil companies and climate change denialists. And as you point out, it's easier to trap emissions in the stack at a generator at the tailpipe.

Profile

firecat: red panda, winking (Default)
firecat (attention machine in need of calibration)

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    123
456789 10
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 18 Jan 2026 02:34 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios