Outsider said:
Seems most everybody here, regardless of their selfish details, wants everything for free as it suits them. Paddlers or not, we live in the real world.
Okay, I'll bite. One of the oldest criticisms against environmentalists attending meetings is, "How did you get here? You drove! You need the pipelines and tankers! How can you deny the infrastructure you are using!" Well, the answer is we drive because the electric solar-powered public transit isn't available. So society is making that choice, not the individual. I don't know that anyone anywhere expressed wanting something for free. I think the problem is people are often blind to the hidden costs, which was why it's worth pointing out, for instance, that damaging infrastructure is just one associated consequence of a so-called 'green' solution. It is not selfish to know the consequences.
So yes, we naysayers live in the real world, but the real world is whacked. For instance, run your hot water without adding cold water. Will it burn your hand? Why do we have millions of hot water tanks across North America keeping water at scorching temperatures to run for a bath or to wash our hands for which we invariably add cold water because the temperature is too high? This is the type of useless waste that goes unaddressed and yet instead of addressing useless waste we add to the generating capacity despite consequences. Last summer I spent 3 1/2 months on the water on a boat so all electricity was solar generated other than some use of a generator when it was cloudy for days on end. So I became very attuned to the use of resources like electricity and water and it is amazing how little you can use when you are required without it impacting lifestyle. For instance, you don't leave a phone charger plugged in that continues an electrical drain even when a phone isn't attached. Just one stupid small example. In a house you ignore this type of thing because it's so easy because you are so removed from the source. Magnify this type of thing by millions and you have a major problem. Such as second freezers in the garage to freeze ham hocks and orange juice cans bought last year. They were on sale and bought in bulk, so you saved some money, and yet you paid $400 in electricity for the freezer over the course of that year. We're flooding the Peace River so people can make stupid purchasing decisions? Or so people don't have to think about how they use resources? That's the selfish aspect. "I want without concern for consequence" is about as selfish as selfish gets.
So I reject any statement of 'get with the program' when the program is flawed. We are fixing the wrong thing, we should be fixing demand first, not capacity, and when we do truly need more capacity it should be done in the most intelligent and least impactful way possible. I reject the outlook that something is 'green' simply because it doesn't create emissions. The real cost needs to be known. With tidal turbines we don't know that yet so we are essentially introducing the potential equivalent of DDTs into the water. The last thing we want is another 'oops, we goofed,' or a debate raging 20-50 years after their introduction as to how much of the negative impact seen in the marine environment can be attributed to tidal turbines once they're as prevalent as fish farms.
So the process here, Outsider, is questioning the process, not wanting selfishly for free. I acknowledge I require electricity. As of May 1 to Oct. 1 that will be almost entirely solar generated, done almost entirely by addressing the amount used. So I plan to live much as I preach, for what that's worth, but not much as most of us don't have an alternative to what's offered unless we fight for change which involves examining and criticizing the status quo. These types of forums are part of that valuable process and turning it back on the people who question the status quo is probably the weakest possible way to forward the debate. It's like the "you drove here, therefore you can't possibly criticize the pipeline" argument. You can't fault someone for not using an alternative when the alternative doesn't exist.
but I can answer this one.
