Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (38709)	3/3/2013 3:17:50 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

Nope; I'm saying they are requiring the utilities to reduce their CO2 output, while at the same time paying no attention to your nonsense. I've been warning them about you. Yeah.. and cost be damned.. And you should "warn them" about me.. Because you can't refute the scientific logic upon which my opinion is based. Meanwhile, there is a NATURAL solution that uses 1 atom of Iron to sequester 13,000 Carbon atoms, AND provides restores the Marine Food chain.. That sounds like a "Win-Win" solution.. Certainly more cost effective and beneficial than any proposal you're submitting.. you just want to punish our economy and make people suffer.. Let me tell you another win-win scenario.. How about we regulate your personal water use? Mandate that it's 100% organically recycled.. Btw, that response on the mine pic was only more ridiculous.. It makes no sense at all.. Most Iron deposited in the oceans is via Aeolian Input. The rest is due to up-welling of bottom sediments to the surface via deep currents. Some more reading for you... gfdl.noaa.gov Hawk