http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dcoal%2Bpower%2Bplant%26toggle%3D1%26ei%3DUTF-8%26imgsz%3Dlarge%26fr%3Dyfp-t-501%26b%3D61&w=800&h=474&imgurl=www.r-s.com%2Fprojects%2Fimages%2FM8G634_1L.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.r-s.com%2Fprojects%2FM8G634.htm&size=95.5kB&name=M8G634_1L.jpg&p=coal+power+plant&type=jpeg&no=70&tt=416&oid=97e0f1a50a731130&ei=UTF-8
and
http://www.whitneynews.com/Coal_Mine_2.JPG
or
http://www.citizenscampaign.org/images/ocean_wind%20.jpg
Which would you rather have in your back yard? Regardless of cost, or effectiveness. I'm just wondering, because of the amount of people who slam wind power because the windmills are "ugly".
Are they any more ugly than:
http://juicymelons.org/~jono/pics/photos/trains_and_cats/cell%20tower.jpg
and yet these have sprung up all over the country without much controversy.
2007-07-23
08:07:01
·
8 answers
·
asked by
joecool123_us
5
in
Environment
➔ Conservation
Gaby: I by no means was suggesting that Wind power would be able to produce all of our energy needs, or that it is predictable. My point was to simply counter the argument that they are "Ugly", and by that logic alone unuseable.
Clearly our energy needs will needed to be met with a one-two punch of a variety of renewable sources and increased conservation.
2007-07-23
18:45:51 ·
update #1