Scope of NatureNS: Re: Long again: Re: Long: Re: [NatureNS] light

Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 23:53:58 -0400
From: Lois Codling <loiscodling@hfx.eastlink.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <d2xp1c15x32svllvvdjadygl.1419124063725@email.android.com>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

YmVsb3cpIHRvIHRoZSBBZHZlcnRpc2VyIEVkaXRvciAoTm90IHVzZWQpIGNvb
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_sBgNd4m3pMhI1+nKliTL9Q)
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Great discussion, Dave et al.  The link below is a new idea for getting 
solar energy from highways!
http://solarroadways.com/main.html

Lois Codling

On 20/12/2014 9:07 PM, desolatechair wrote:
> The 'delete it if you don't want to read it' argument has always been 
> a conundrum to me.   It's difficult to make the delete decision 
> without knowing the contents, ie reading the post first.
>
> I suppose I could make an arbitrary decision to delete all posts by a 
> given writer.  But that would limit my exposure to new and different 
> ideas, and defeat the purpose of subscribing to this list in the first 
> place.
>
> Respects,
>
> Jamie
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: David & Alison Webster
> Date:12-20-2014 7:33 PM (GMT-04:00)
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Scope of NatureNS: Re: Long again: Re: Long: Re: [NatureNS] 
> light
>
> Hi Nick & All Dec 20, 2014
>     The capsule description of the scope of NatureNS, copied from the 
> "Welcome to NatureNS" e-mail is--
> "Why have NatureNS
>
>      The site is provided for the sharing of information on
> 1) the natural history of Nova Scotia and surrounding waters,
> 2) it's conservation, and
> 3) events and activities associated with it."
>     All members are furnished with an effective weapon for posts they 
> don't wish to read; the delete button. If this were a mechanical 
> device then mine would have been worn out many times.
>     My recent posts bear on possible ways to decrease acid rain and 
> emission of greenhouse gasses. I think both are important topics in 
> the context of conservation.
>     There is a widespread myth that there is no practical way to store 
> surplus wind energy and thus an ongoing need to continue thermal 
> generation. NS Power finds this excuse convenient because pouring coal 
> in one end of an existing pollution factory and getting power out the 
> other end does not take a great deal of planning or coordination. In 
> addition, the Donkin mine may open soon so it is possible that NSP 
> will be encouraged to use this local resource as much as possible by 
> expanding thermal generation capacity.
>     Opposition to wind generation has often come strangely enough from 
> Naturalists; organizations or individuals. This was helped I expect by 
> a famous site in California that was set in a raptor migration channel 
> in a mountain pass by, what a concidence, a Petrochemical Company. 
> There may still be some opposition to wind on Naturens so I think 
> refreshing the screen is justified.
>     And for the benefit of those who have joined recently I will paste 
> an old post--
> START OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
> Dear All, Sept 12, 2007
> Wind energy has some serious drawbacks that seem to have been
> overlooked, the most serious being--
> 1) COST: How will increases in the cost of wind be absorbed into the
> cost structure ?
>
> 2) MERCURY: Using wind to generate electrical power could result in less
> usage of coal and thus less Hg in the environment. With less Hg in the
> environment, Loons might become low in Hg, ride higher in the water and
> consequently become top-heavy and have a tendency to flip sideways and
> gargle at critical points in the call.
>
> 3) SEA BIRDS: Using wind to generate electrical power could result in
> less usage of oil and less oiling of birds at sea. This biocontrol helps
> to avoid overcrowding of sea bird colonies so a decrease in oil spills
> could have serious consequences.
>
> 4) TREES: Using wind to generate electrical power could result in lower
> concentrations of low-level Ozone, acid-rain and consequently lead to
> less effective biocontrol of trees. And consequently, for example,
> Spruce trees in the Annapolis Valley might begin to live longer than 80
> years, posing dangerous navigation hazards to flying birds as compared
> to a low cover of Heath, Sedge and Alder
>
> 5) AIR: Using wind to generate electrical power could result in a lower
> incidence of smog alerts, respiratory ailments and presumably health
> problems in birds or other air-breathing wildlife. A decrease in the
> incidence of smog could increase life expectancy, cause overcrowding and
> increase the demand for electricity and nesting sites.
>
> 6) WIND: Using wind to generate electrical power is likely to slow the
> wind down so that it doesn't get there on time, causing air pockets. The
> recent Westjet air-pocket incident, far from the nearest wind farm,
> shows how dangerous this effect can be.
>
> Yours truly, Dave Webster, Kentville
> END OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
> Yt, DW
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Nicholas Hill <mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com>
>     *To:* naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
>     *Sent:* Saturday, December 20, 2014 3:58 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: Long again: Re: Long: Re: [NatureNS] light
>
>     Is this narure?
>     Nick
>
>     On Dec 20, 2014 3:54 PM, "David & Alison Webster"
>     <dwebster@glinx.com <mailto:dwebster@glinx.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi Steve & All,                                    Dec 20, 2014
>            Systems which do not work well, such as the Wales site, do
>         not prove that pumped storage can not work anymore than I can
>         prove, by direct demonstration, that music can not be
>         extracted from a violin.
>
>            For pumped storage to work reliably one must have volume
>         sufficient to ride out any prolonged period of calm. An
>         account of a system which does work,
>         cut from a 2012 e-mail is pasted below.
>
>         START OF PASTE
>            Re Ludington my letter (pasted below) to the Advertiser
>         Editor (Not used) contains the essentials. Also see
>         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludington_Pumped_Storage_Power_Plant
>         START OF PASTE
>         Dear Editor:                    Sept 24, 2012
>            According to Warren Peck (Register, Can we trust CANWEA ads
>         ?,Aug 2), electrical storage is still in the research and
>         development stage.
>            Well, the pumped storage facility in Ludington, Michigan
>         was built
>         between 1967 and 1975, is still functioning and has a capacity
>         of 1872
>         Megawatts. It has served so well