Activists dump tonnes of coal in Vattenfall protest

SLUSK wrote: »

The title says it all, environmental activists dump 18 tonnes of coal outside government offices in Stockholm, Sweden.
http://www.thelocal.se/22930/20091028/

The question is, how environmentally friendly is it to transport 18 tonnes of coal via trucks from Germany to Sweden and then dumping it on the streets?

Here's a little secret they don't want you to know: Eco-whackos don't actually oppose coal-fired power, they consider it an acceptable alternative to nuclear energy. Like those eco-whacko hippies that protested the nuclear power plant plan at Carnsore Point in the '70s.

In another thread we're (still) discussing the unreliability of weather-based renewables, and the primitive and experimental nature of complimentary storage technologies. And this is 30-odd years later!

So what did those hippies in the 1970s think Ireland was going to do instead? That's right, Coal, Gas, Peat. And lots of it! Yipee!

So when an eco-whacko tells you he opposes nuclear electricity BUT ALSO opposes coal like those Greenpeaces, they either

1. Are living in cloud cukoo land
2. Have an agenda, want us all to live in Yurts, scrap our cars and grow organic vegetables. Or herd us all into apartment blocks and otherwise dictate our lifestyles in the name of "Carbon Footprints" (while their own loopy policies unnecessarily increase all our carbon footprints.)

These activists seem to have the same kind of twisted logic lika Al Gore. They themselves are allowed to pollute and mess up the environment but not us regular folk.

For many of these activists, logic doesn't come into it.

Judgement Day wrote: »

Sorry SeanW but I think you're being very simplistic in your description of anybody concerned with the environment as an 'eco-whacko' and I wonder do you include yourself in this as I seem to remember you said that you were an environmentalist on a previous thread?

No. Not to either of us. I am referring to pinheads who think its just a question building more windmills or extreme environmentalists with a new world order or utopian ultra eco-sensitivity agenda.

I am an extremely anti-nuclear but yes I do worry about acid rain, CO2 emissions etc from coal/oil/peat fired power stations but I don't have all the answers like some people appear to.

I won't knock you for that - I was in your camp about 4 years ago, paniced ****less by all the scare stories about Chernobyl accident and radioactive fish in the Irish sea and Sellafield this, that and the other.

So I've been there and - having had cause to re-examine the facts and change my mind as a result - I know all about the scaremongering and bulls***ing that might lead an otherwise reasonable person such as yourself to the position you now hold. Can't fault you for it on that basis.

However even when I held my former anti-nuclear views, I at least had the common sense to realise how logically insolvent it would have been to oppose both nuclear and the main thermal energies. On that basis, I never claimed to do so.

Like a lot of people you seem to see many issues as black and white whereas in reality there are many shades of grey. I know that I won't convert you into an eco-warrior but try chilling out and easing up on the anti-anybody who gets off their backsides to protest lark.

There's good protests and there's bad protests. Want to have a protest against SCAMA ... oops ... NAMA? I'm right behind you. Want to picket a traditional thermal power plant, on the basis of having a better plan, based on logic and natural justice for our planet and our people? Tell me when and where, and I'll be there.

But as for people protesting for bad things (like those public servants going to protest to protect their overpaid jobs and lack of accountability when the country is broke) or against good things (like the Carnsore Point hippies) based on ignorance, superstition or an agenda ... sorry but you can expect a little bashing.