Cycloptichorn wrote:
I am a strong supporter of nuclear as well as other renewable technologies; were I provided with other options for my power generation, I would take them. In fact, though I cannot control the power usage at my place of business, I voluntarily pay a higher rate for my home power usage in order to subsidize the local wind generation facilities.
Appealing to Extremes is a poor form of argumentation.
Cycloptichorn
Saying that burning fossil fuels cause pollution IS a poor form of argumentation. Because demonizing something while not mentionning its benefits is biased reasonning.
Everybody loves to have an energy without pollution. But like free lunch, there is no such thing.
And if it ever existed, the pollution-free integrists would shoot themselves in the foot since an energy without pollution would encourage to waste MORE of it, mostly among the richest who can afford to "voluntarily pay a higher rate" who happens to be also the most wasteful ones (check out the numbers, the richer you are, how "green" you are, the more you consume energy , that's an inconvenient fact).
Eh he, take pause and ponder, something must be wrong in the logic house of cards.
and did find this source: ENERGY BULLETIN
