|
G8 Leaders Tout Massive Wind Farms To Thwart Global Warming
According to an anonymous source, the conglomeration of world leaders at the recent G8 Summit in Scotland decided almost unanimously on an initiative to combat the threat of global warming. Their answer: strategically placed wind farms aimed at cooling the overall air temperature of the globe.The announcement of the news was forestalled by the recent terror bombings that ripped through the London underground on July 7th. The plan was presented to the meeting of world leaders by an international scientific team made up of American and British climate experts, the Wind and Hydropower Institute for Rapid Recooling (WHIRR) pulling from a collection of research known as the British Refrigeration Resource Repository (BRRR). The proposal was spearheaded by Lord May, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's leading scientific institution. "Never before have we faced such a global threat. And if we do not begin effective action now, it will be much harder to stop the runaway train as it continues to gather momentum," Lord May said to the summit members. The plan calls for a multi billion dollar construction program aimed at "wind redirection"- massive wind farms, that would take up land the size of New York state, with over 600,000 massive wind turbines, some over 200 meters high with blades stretching to 50 to 75 meters long. These farms would be placed in oceanic and large lake areas, as well as regions near the North and South Poles, pulling the chilling wind from surface of the water and redirecting them outward toward the poles. The wind farms would set up a sophisticated network of wind transmission thought to stop melting glacial formations and eventually end global warming. Based on the presentation, the UK Government is proposing to reclaim half of all available land in Kent and Essex to erect the wind farms. Four Scottish Islands have already been purchased under compulsory purchase orders. In all over 2,million perhaps many more 'giant wind turbines will be produced and erected with immediate effect. Canada and Russia, nearest to the Arctic Circle, will bare the brunt of 'front line turbines', with over 500,000 each. Argentina and Australia are also considering front line wind farm efforts on an equal scale. President George W. Bush, who has been under heavy criticism for his refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing global emissions, was quick to sign on to the effort. Mr. Bush felt that the building and maintaining of the gasoline-powered turbines would create badly needed jobs while answering the world's call to a "War on Warming." "Global warming has aroused a sleeping, sweaty giant. The American people are committed to ending this cancerous threat to our way of life," said the President. Bush said land surrounding the Great Lakes and most of the lakes in Minnesota would be claimed by the government under the rule of eminent domain. The project is expected to take six years at an expense of $70 billion. Six of the world leaders agreed that a global initiative was needed to solve a global threat. President Jacques Chirac of France and Gerhard Schroeder of Germany dissented the majority opinion claiming the effectiveness of such an expensive and land-consuming endeavor lacked empirical evidence. President Chirac took the debate one step further by accusing President George W. Bush and his administration of cooking the books on wind farms, and accusing British Prime Minister Tony Blair of being a puppet of the American agenda setters. The type of wind farms proposed, argued Chirac, would exclusively run on gasoline, implying that the giant wind turbines would only serve to fatten the pockets of oil tycoons. In addition, Chirac expressed disappointment that none of the other countries had asked for French input on turbine development. Environmentalists have voiced concern and mixed emotions about the initiative. While global warming is high on their list of concerns, they were reticent to accept the emissions produced by giant gasoline powered fans. In addition, they expressed worry over the potential loss of birds. It is estimated that in Toronto alone, because of the tall buildings, 10,000 birds die every year from colliding with the stationary structures. Supports dispute those estimates by citing the 7000 turbines already erected in California along a migratory route that have been responsible for only 0.2 bird deaths per turbine per year. While it is unknown if California birds are smarter than Canadian birds, experts say a loss of birds could have the added benefit of controlling the spread of the Asian bird flu. Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the University of London says the idea is without merit. Mending the world's looming climate woes with wind farms, he says, "is like trying to solve the pensions' crisis by putting a tax on babies' nappies. It stinks." The professor went on to say that cold was not desirable anyway as cooler climes promoted bad economies, declining agriculture, disease, and a lack of biodiversity. "And it is all aeolian ephemerality anyway," he added. **The entirety of the above article is false and should not be believed by anybody with half a brain. Cheers. Fooled Google who classified it as news. Posted by: phil_b 2005-07-23 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=124733 |