being released in mass quanities from that ginormous lithium battery electricity storage facility in California unrelated to the LA fires..... wind turbines, solar farms, E vehicles....catastrophic for our environment?
way OT: hydroflouride
- Thread starter dinglefritz
- Start date
Poison the food, medicine and water..
Why not the air?
Why not the air?
It's nothing to mess with that is for sure. Oil companies have had issues with it for years. Someone died from exposure a couple years ago.
Mining rare earth minerals for the electricity generating components for wind towers definitely releases a lot of toxic by-products. The best kept secret is how much oil is required to lubricate those tower turbines. The polymers used to produce the blades can’t be non-toxic and we have huge piles of unrecyclable used blades accumulating.
Last edited:
Are we really having this debate again? Wind turbines, solar farms, e vehicles are all great and growing technologies. And will almost surely present less problems once fully built out than previous generation technologies. Not claiming they're perfect, but they're more than good enough.
And sure you need storage. I don't like battery energy storage. I prefer pumped storage hydro (PSH) and flywheels instead and think they're more scalable solutions.
Another scam, if solar and wind were so reliant why do they get huge subsidies? Give me nuclear power or natural gas hell even coal over those two any day
I was wondering when you would weigh in. I tend to disagree with this, but my friend's Facebook news feed seems to point all blame on solar and wind so I guess I'll defer to your expertise.
That’s why you have huge battery electricity storage facilities like the one that is on fire and can’t be put out.
Subsidies for solar and wind pale compared to the trillions in historical subsidies for oil, gas, and coal. Solar and wind are now the cheapest energy sources globally, unsubsidized. Nuclear costs 2-3x more per MWh and takes decades to build. Natural gas and coal emit massive CO₂, driving climate disasters. Facts over ignorance any day.
All energy production is subsidized—including agriculture—because without energy we don’t have a civilization.
Oil and gas facilities release hydrogen fluoride (HF) into the air, especially during refining, where it’s used as a catalyst in alkylation units to produce high-octane fuels. Comparing fossil fuel burning to a rare battery fire is disingenuous. Fossil fuels inherently belch CO₂ and toxic gases into the atmosphere with every use—it’s their defining feature. Imagine you’re in a closed garage running power. An Erayak 4500PD Tri-Fuel Inverter Generator fills the space with deadly fumes, while an EcoFlow DELTA Pro battery runs silently, cleanly—unless it’s burning. So, unless on fire, batteries release far less HF, while the generator is effectively always on fire.
The Earth is like that garage, with gas molecules held by gravity to our closed system.
What do plants use? You ever think that’s why farmers are raising record yields, did you know that it didn’t take ten years for the soils to become sulfur deficient after the government mandated low sulfur in fuel and oil? Getting to net zero carbon emissions everything dies? Again another scam to enrich the elites
I didn’t compare the battery fire to burning fossil fuels but how much fossil fuel was burned in the mining, manufacture, transportation and assembly of that battery storage facility. This is just the first large scale fire. No doubt there will be more.
Ironically the fires in LA have already produced more greenhouse gasses than the last two decades of our efforts to reduce them have accomplished. Meanwhile China and India have picked up the slack.
Fossil fuels release HF, CO₂, and other pollutants daily—no accidents required. They poison the air, harm ecosystems, and fuel climate change on a massive scale.
As for the tired claim that building anything at scale harms the environment—you’re right, but the difference is purpose. Building renewables and batteries fights climate collapse. Burning fossil fuels accelerates it. Not all harm is created equal.
Crops use CO₂ for photosynthesis, but more CO₂ doesn’t mean better yields indefinitely. Excessive CO₂ disrupts optimal growing conditions by fueling extreme weather, droughts, and heat waves, which harm agriculture. Record yields come from advancements in plant genetics, irrigation, and precision farming—not fossil fuel pollution. As for sulfur, modern fertilizers address soil deficiencies; burning dirty fuels is neither sustainable nor necessary. Net zero ensures a livable planet, not ‘everything dies.’ The real scam is protecting polluters while pretending their emissions somehow benefit farming
I agree that the elites ****ing everything up tho, lol.
The CO2 level in the atmosphere is .04%. Same as it has been for years. Simply stating we've had hotter global temps in a small time frame is short sighted when the weather patterns on earth run in much longer patterns. Wind and solar power are highly inefficient and not reliable during extreme weather. They may be solutions someday, but today is not that day. Not to mention the "green plan" is a main cause of most current geopolotical issues. Open up the keystone pipeline.
natural volcanoes seem to operate unencumbered producing 85-97% of the worlds co2 and many other toxic gases
Surprised we haven’t legislated them being shut down…..seems logical
Yeah, but can any of this stuff improve Nebraska football? I want answers by Monday morning!
Global warming will make Nebraska climate more attractive to recruits is my gusss
And lake property in Minnesota, the Dakotas and so on is not going down in value any time soon.
Don't even get me started on ethanol...... People love to talk small government but don't really want that. People on both sides love socialism. They just want smaller government for what they don't like.
