Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

California's Rooftop Solar Push Is Now A Big Problem For The Environment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • California's Rooftop Solar Push Is Now A Big Problem For The Environment

    in the early 2000s, California went big on subsidizing and pushing rooftop solar panels for residents. Now, as most of those panels near the end of their 25-30 year lifespan, there's little to no plan on how to dispose of them. Some are already ending up in landfills, poisoning the nearby water and land with heavy metals.

    A perfect example of how the left/AGW crowd pushes for things to be done for the sake of doing them, whether they help or hurt, and thinking little of the longterm consequences (similar can be seen with the electric vehicle push, which doesn't pay any mind to the open pit mines and poisonous aftermath of the batteries used)

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/californi...120043034.html
    California has been a pioneer in pushing for rooftop solar power, building up the largest solar market in the U.S. More than 20 years and 1.3 million rooftops later, the bill is coming due.

    Beginning in 2006, the state, focused on how to incentivize people to take up solar power, showered subsidies on homeowners who installed photovoltaic panels but had no comprehensive plan to dispose of them. Now, panels purchased under those programs are nearing the end of their typical 25-to-30-year life cycle.

    Many are already winding up in landfills, where in some cases, they could potentially contaminate groundwater with toxic heavy metals such as lead, selenium and cadmium.

    Sam Vanderhoof, a solar industry expert and chief executive of Recycle PV Solar, says that only 1 in 10 panels are actually recycled, according to estimates drawn from International Renewable Energy Agency data on decommissioned panels and from industry leaders.

    The looming challenge over how to handle truckloads of waste, some of it contaminated, illustrates how cutting-edge environmental policy can create unforeseen problems down the road.

    “The industry is supposed to be green,” Vanderhoof said. “But in reality, it’s all about the money.”

    California came early to solar power. Small governmental rebates did little to bring down the price of solar panels or to encourage their adoption until 2006, when the California Public Utilities Commission formed the California Solar Initiative. That granted $3.3 billion in subsidies for installing solar panels on rooftops.

    The measure exceeded its goals, bringing down the price of solar panels and boosting the share of the state’s electricity produced by the sun. Because of that and other measures, such as requirements that utilities buy a portion of their electricity from renewable sources, solar power now accounts for 15% of the state’s power.

    But as California barreled ahead on its renewable-energy program, focusing on rebates and — more recently — a proposed solar tax, questions about how to handle the waste that would accrue years later were never fully addressed. Now, both regulators and panel manufacturers are realizing that they don’t have the capacity to handle what comes next.

    “This trash is probably going to arrive sooner than we expected and it is going to be a huge amount of waste,” said Serasu Duran, an assistant professor at the University of Calgary's Haskayne School of Business in Canada. “But while all the focus has been on building this renewable capacity, not much consideration has been put on the end of life of these technologies.”

    Duran co-wrote a recent article in the Harvard Business Review that noted the industry’s “capacity is woefully unprepared for the deluge of waste that is likely to come.”

    It’s not just a problem in California but also nationwide. A new solar project was installed every 60 seconds in 2021, according to a fact sheet published by the Solar Energy Industries Assn., and the solar industry is expected to quadruple in size between 2020 and 2030.

    Although 80% of a typical photovoltaic panel is made of recyclable materials, disassembling them and recovering the glass, silver and silicon is extremely difficult.

    “There's no doubt that there will be an increase in the solar panels entering the waste stream in the next decade or so,” said AJ Orben, vice president of We Recycle Solar, a Phoenix-based company that breaks down panels and extracts the valuable metals while disposing of toxic elements. “That's never been a question.”

    The vast majority of We Recycle Solar’s business comes from California, but the company has no facilities in the state. Instead, the panels are trucked to a site in Yuma, Ariz. That’s because California’s rigorous permitting system for toxic materials makes it exceedingly difficult to set up shop, Orben said.

    Recycling solar panels isn’t a simple process. Highly specialized equipment and workers are needed to separate the aluminum frame and junction box from the panel without shattering it into glass shards. Specialized furnaces are used to heat panels to recover silicon. In most states, panels are classified as hazardous materials, which require expensive restrictions on packaging, transport and storage. (The vast majority of residential solar arrays in the U.S. are crystalline silicon panels, which can contain lead, although it's less prevalent in newer panels. Thin-film solar panels, which contain cadmium and selenium, are primarily used in utility-grade applications.)

    Orben said the economics of the process don’t make a compelling case for recycling.

    Only about $2 to $4 worth of materials are recovered from each panel. The majority of processing costs are tied to labor, and Orben said even recycling panels at scale would not be more economical.

    Most research on photovoltaic panels is focused on recovering solar-grade silicon to make recycling economically viable.

    That skews the economic incentives against recycling. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimated that it costs roughly $20 to $30 to recycle a panel versus $1 to $2 to send it to a landfill.

    Most experts assume that is where the majority of panels are ending up right now. But it’s anyone’s guess. Natalie Click, a doctoral candidate in materials science at the University of Arizona, said there is no uniform system “for tracking where all of these decommissioned panels are going.”

    The California Department of Toxic Substances collected its first data on panels recycled by universal waste handlers in 2021. For handlers that accepted more than 200 pounds or generated more than 10,000 pounds of panels, the DTSC counted 335 panels accepted for recycling, said Sanford Nax, a spokesman for the agency.

    The department expects the number of installed solar panels in the next decade to exceed hundreds of millions in California alone, and that recycling will become even more crucial as cheaper panels with shorter life spans become more popular.

    A lack of consumer awareness about the toxicity of materials in some panels and how to dispose of them is part of the problem, experts said.

    “There's an informational gap, there's a technological gap, and there's a financial gap that we're working on,” said Amanda Bybee, co-founder of SolarRecycle.org, a website aimed at helping people understand how to recycle solar panels and how the process works.

    Last year, new DTSC regulation came into effect that reclassified the panels, changing the way they can be collected and transported. Previously, all panels were required to be treated as hazardous waste upon removal, which restricted transportation and storage.

    Both business and residential consumers, or generators as they are called in the recycling industry, were supposed to transport the panels themselves to certified recycling or hazardous waste disposal facilities. With little tracking, it’s unclear how frequently that occurred.

    Now, panels are classified as universal waste and can be collected at more than 400 universal waste handlers in California, where they are then assessed and transported to disposal, reuse or recycle facilities. (In cases where panels containing toxic materials are relegated to landfills, they are sent to facilities with extra safeguards against leakage.) The new regulations were intended to make it easier for people to turn in their panels, but it does not directly address the next step — recycling.

    “What that [rule] does is really just changes how that material is handled, managed, stored, and transported,” said Orben of We Recycle Solar. “It doesn't change how that material is actually processed.”

    In 2016, the Solar Energy Industries Assn., a nonprofit trade association for the U.S. solar industry, started a recycling program for panels. Robert Nicholson, the manager of PV Recycling at the association, said it aims to help the industry group's recycling partners — five so far — “develop compliant, cost-effective recycling services for end-of-life modules.”

    “The majority of recyclers are already existing recyclers; they're primarily doing e-waste or they're doing glass,” said Evelyn Butler, the association's vice president of technical services. “So we have had to work with them to kind of take that leap, to say: ‘We believe that the processes you're using can accommodate the technology.’” The association also works with regulators to draft legislation that decreases the number of panels heading to landfills.

    Government subsidies are one way to make solar panel recycling economically viable for the waste generators, who now bear much of the cost of recycling.

    In Europe, a recently enacted regulation called the European Union Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive places responsibility on producers for supporting their products through responsible end-of-life disposal. It requires all producers that manufacture panels for countries in the EU to finance end-of-life collection and recycling.

    Similar legislation has been attempted in several U.S. states, including Washington, where the Photovoltaic Module Stewardship and Takeback Program will require solar panel manufacturers to finance end-of-life recycling. The initiative was passed in 2017 and will begin implementation in 2025. It’s the only producer-responsibility law in the United States.

    It’s part of a larger strategy in the recycling industry called extended producer responsibility, in which the cost of recycling is built into the cost of a product at its initial purchase. Business entities in the product chain — rather than the general public — become responsible for end-of-life costs, including recycling costs.

    In a 2020 interview with PV Magazine, Jigar Shah, co-founder of Generate Capital, a fund that invests in sustainable infrastructure, said the problem can be addressed at the very start of the product chain — by manufacturers. Shah, who is now director of the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office, said that policymakers need to require manufacturers to come up with a standard design that makes panels easier and cheaper to recycle.

    “It’s far more cost-effective for manufacturers to be forced to work together … where they try to greatly reduce the cost of all that collectively. That happens through policy,” he said. “It doesn’t happen through people opting in.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/californi...120043034.html

  • #2
    Yet another example of the law of unintended consequences.
    "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

    "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

    Comment


    • #3
      Yup --- in their fervor to appease their Climate gods, they have only added to their own headaches.

      Same with windmill blades. And what about all those electric car batteries?
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
        A perfect example of how the left/AGW crowd pushes for things to be done for the sake of doing them, whether they help or hurt, and thinking little of the longterm consequences (similar can be seen with the electric vehicle push, which doesn't pay any mind to the open pit mines and poisonous aftermath of the batteries used)
        Or the fact that our current power grid is almost at its limit and would not be able support a significant number of people charging up their electric cars every day.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

          Or the fact that our current power grid is almost at its limit and would not be able support a significant number of people charging up their electric cars every day.
          I'm a Global Citizen -- I go around the city at night unplugging electric vehicles to save the grid.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #6
            As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decide to go big on the while Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decide to go big on the while Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?
              Still trying to parse that sentence.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decide to go big on the while Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?
                As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decided to go big on the whole Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                  in the early 2000s, California went big on subsidizing and pushing rooftop solar panels for residents. Now, as most of those panels near the end of their 25-30 year lifespan, there's little to no plan on how to dispose of them. Some are already ending up in landfills, poisoning the nearby water and land with heavy metals.

                  A perfect example of how the left/AGW crowd pushes for things to be done for the sake of doing them, whether they help or hurt, and thinking little of the longterm consequences (similar can be seen with the electric vehicle push, which doesn't pay any mind to the open pit mines and poisonous aftermath of the batteries used)
                  My Californian brother swears by his decision to have solar panels installed. They saved him huge sums of money because they paid for themselves. Granted, he's only had them for about 10 years and they're still in operation.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decided to go big on the whole Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?
                    That's much more clear.

                    Thanks.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Rather than start another similar thread...

                      The real-world consequences of green extremism

                      JULY 13, 2022 02:46 PM
                      BY
                      HUGO GURDON
                      Glorious pictures from the edge of the universe have arrived on Earth just when events here force us to consider the possibility that governments are run by aliens. They are so out of touch with common sense that they must come from other planets.

                      The James Webb Space Telescope, a wonder of human ingenuity, resourcefulness, imagination, and creative curiosity, is revealing the birth of galaxies to a world in which, by contrast, overreaching oligarchs and bossy bureaucrats constrict the actions of ordinary people trying to make their own lives and the lives of others better.

                      Much of the world groans under immiserating rules handed down by a “theory class,” even though they obviously don’t work. The accolade for the most disastrous policy outcome is hotly contested, and Wednesday’s grim revelation of 9.1% inflation shows that President Joe Biden’s spending agenda is a strong contender. But even that might not take the cake.

                      Worse, perhaps, are the results of hyper-alarmism on climate change. Excessive environmental policies are proving disastrous worldwide. Suddenly, all the green chickens are coming home to roost.

                      Intolerant “liberals” keen to “save the planet” are ruining it — officiously preventing the poor from lifting themselves out of poverty, forcing wealthy nations to retreat from comfort and efficiency into backwardness, even killing people by the hundreds of thousands.

                      Humankind long ago acquired the technological ability to thrive in all climes, but citizens of the most advanced nations must now check the weather forecast to know if their fridges and household lights will work or be shut down in an electricity blackout.

                      In Britain, overdependence on wind turbines built to cut carbon emissions leaves inhabitants at the mercy of the weather . When the wind doesn’t blow, the economy doesn’t work.

                      Likewise, in Germany, the world’s fourth-biggest economy, calm summer air means turbines stand idle, incapable of producing electricity and jacking up energy prices irrespective of the nation’s equally asinine overdependence on gas supplies from a recalcitrant Russia.

                      Excessively tight emissions rules, which amount to “anti-farming policies,” have triggered protests across Europe. They started in the Netherlands, where 30% of farms might be put out of business. And they have spread to Germany, Italy, Spain, and Poland, where farmers fear being subjected to the same privations.

                      If, as expected, bureaucratic meddling slashes Dutch output — the Netherlands is one of the biggest and most efficient farming nations in the world — production will shift to less efficient, more polluting producers elsewhere.

                      This is similar to the attack that green zealots in the Democratic Party launched against American energy production at the start of the Biden administration. By shutting down energy leases and discouraging investment in the United States because of exaggerated and parochial climate concerns, the green oligarchy transfers production and wealth to dirtier producers overseas, such as Russia.

                      As a result, gas prices across the country are higher than they’ve ever been and getting higher still. Basic energy costs, such as heat and air conditioning, are also more expensive. And yet California Democrats’ response to this crisis has been to pass local ordinances forcing citizens to phase out natural gas , one of the most affordable sources of energy, altogether over the next several years.

                      The results of shortsighted, self-defeating enviro-extremism are bad enough in rich nations. But they are even worse in the undeveloped world. In Sri Lanka, which banned chemical fertilizers in a fit of adherence to global green pressure, crops collapsed and food inflation spiked to 80% in June. The result has been a public revolt, including the overthrow of the president and an occupation of his palace by disgruntled citizens.

                      ...


                      More "unintended consequences" from the genius left.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                        My Californian brother swears by his decision to have solar panels installed. They saved him huge sums of money because they paid for themselves. Granted, he's only had them for about 10 years and they're still in operation.
                        I'm sure it can be a good financial decision on an individual level. The problem from an environmental standpoint is what to do with these thousands upon thousands of panels that are end of life and need to be disposed of. That's something most consumers don't think about, or if they do think about it, most of them don't care because, as they see it, it's somebody else's problem.
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          As an aside, can anyone think of anywhere that decided to go big on the whole Go Green movement that we can look at like three to five years later and see some sort of improvement?
                          With impeccable timing this was at the top of the RCP feed today

                          Source: The real-world consequences of green extremism



                          [...]


                          Worse, perhaps, are the results of hyper-alarmism on climate change. Excessive environmental policies are proving disastrous worldwide. Suddenly, all the green chickens are coming home to roost.

                          Intolerant “liberals” keen to “save the planet” are ruining it — officiously preventing the poor from lifting themselves out of poverty, forcing wealthy nations to retreat from comfort and efficiency into backwardness, even killing people by the hundreds of thousands.

                          Humankind long ago acquired the technological ability to thrive in all climes, but citizens of the most advanced nations must now check the weather forecast to know if their fridges and household lights will work or be shut down in an electricity blackout.

                          In Britain, overdependence on wind turbines built to cut carbon emissions leaves inhabitants at the mercy of the weather . When the wind doesn’t blow, the economy doesn’t work.

                          Likewise, in Germany, the world’s fourth-biggest economy, calm summer air means turbines stand idle, incapable of producing electricity and jacking up energy prices irrespective of the nation’s equally asinine overdependence on gas supplies from a recalcitrant Russia.

                          Excessively tight emissions rules, which amount to “anti-farming policies,” have triggered protests across Europe. They started in the Netherlands, where 30% of farms might be put out of business. And they have spread to Germany, Italy, Spain, and Poland, where farmers fear being subjected to the same privations.

                          If, as expected, bureaucratic meddling slashes Dutch output — the Netherlands is one of the biggest and most efficient farming nations in the world — production will shift to less efficient, more polluting producers elsewhere.

                          This is similar to the attack that green zealots in the Democratic Party launched against American energy production at the start of the Biden administration. By shutting down energy leases and discouraging investment in the United States because of exaggerated and parochial climate concerns, the green oligarchy transfers production and wealth to dirtier producers overseas, such as Russia.

                          As a result, gas prices across the country are higher than they’ve ever been and getting higher still. Basic energy costs, such as heat and air conditioning, are also more expensive. And yet California Democrats’ response to this crisis has been to pass local ordinances forcing citizens to phase out natural gas , one of the most affordable sources of energy, altogether over the next several years.

                          The results of shortsighted, self-defeating enviro-extremism are bad enough in rich nations. But they are even worse in the undeveloped world. In Sri Lanka, which banned chemical fertilizers in a fit of adherence to global green pressure, crops collapsed and food inflation spiked to 80% in June. The result has been a public revolt, including the overthrow of the president and an occupation of his palace by disgruntled citizens.

                          The specter of starvation is now being reported from Africa, and the latest analysis from the U.N. World Food Program suggests that 670 million people, 8% of the world’s population, will face hunger by the end of the decade.

                          The World Health Organization calculates that 439,000 Africans die every year from indoor air pollution because they are forced — for cooking, lighting, and heating — to burn charcoal and cattle dung, which one researcher compared to smoking 400 cigarettes per hour in the home. The reason Africans still use these primitive methods to generate energy is that green ideologues in rich nations won’t allow them to get financing to build coal-fired power stations.

                          Extreme environmentalism is an ideology that cares little for human life, even regards it as a blight on the Earth that should be reduced. Its instinctive sympathies are against our species. It wants less economic growth, less entrepreneurial spirit, less development, less energy, less safety, less food, less comfort.

                          Who suffers? Those in poor nations, of course, and we in the rich nations that impose our obsessions on ourselves and on others wherever we can.

                          But we can’t impose them everywhere. So, who doesn’t suffer? Our enemies, China in particular, that watch our self-harming foolishness with delight and perhaps a little astonishment. Beijing, which in recent years built more coal-fired power stations than the rest of the world combined, sits back and watches as the self-doubting, self-hating West cedes its prosperity and global leadership.

                          We’re now able, with our dazzling technology, to look billions of light years from the surface of our planet all the way to the rim of outer space and to peer back as far as the beginning of the universe. But here on Earth, we blind ourselves with ideology and cannot see what’s staring us in the face.


                          Source

                          © Copyright Original Source



                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            With impeccable timing this was at the top of the RCP feed today

                            Source: The real-world consequences of green extremism



                            [...]


                            Worse, perhaps, are the results of hyper-alarmism on climate change. Excessive environmental policies are proving disastrous worldwide. Suddenly, all the green chickens are coming home to roost.

                            Intolerant “liberals” keen to “save the planet” are ruining it — officiously preventing the poor from lifting themselves out of poverty, forcing wealthy nations to retreat from comfort and efficiency into backwardness, even killing people by the hundreds of thousands.

                            Humankind long ago acquired the technological ability to thrive in all climes, but citizens of the most advanced nations must now check the weather forecast to know if their fridges and household lights will work or be shut down in an electricity blackout.

                            In Britain, overdependence on wind turbines built to cut carbon emissions leaves inhabitants at the mercy of the weather . When the wind doesn’t blow, the economy doesn’t work.

                            Likewise, in Germany, the world’s fourth-biggest economy, calm summer air means turbines stand idle, incapable of producing electricity and jacking up energy prices irrespective of the nation’s equally asinine overdependence on gas supplies from a recalcitrant Russia.

                            Excessively tight emissions rules, which amount to “anti-farming policies,” have triggered protests across Europe. They started in the Netherlands, where 30% of farms might be put out of business. And they have spread to Germany, Italy, Spain, and Poland, where farmers fear being subjected to the same privations.

                            If, as expected, bureaucratic meddling slashes Dutch output — the Netherlands is one of the biggest and most efficient farming nations in the world — production will shift to less efficient, more polluting producers elsewhere.

                            This is similar to the attack that green zealots in the Democratic Party launched against American energy production at the start of the Biden administration. By shutting down energy leases and discouraging investment in the United States because of exaggerated and parochial climate concerns, the green oligarchy transfers production and wealth to dirtier producers overseas, such as Russia.

                            As a result, gas prices across the country are higher than they’ve ever been and getting higher still. Basic energy costs, such as heat and air conditioning, are also more expensive. And yet California Democrats’ response to this crisis has been to pass local ordinances forcing citizens to phase out natural gas , one of the most affordable sources of energy, altogether over the next several years.

                            The results of shortsighted, self-defeating enviro-extremism are bad enough in rich nations. But they are even worse in the undeveloped world. In Sri Lanka, which banned chemical fertilizers in a fit of adherence to global green pressure, crops collapsed and food inflation spiked to 80% in June. The result has been a public revolt, including the overthrow of the president and an occupation of his palace by disgruntled citizens.

                            The specter of starvation is now being reported from Africa, and the latest analysis from the U.N. World Food Program suggests that 670 million people, 8% of the world’s population, will face hunger by the end of the decade.

                            The World Health Organization calculates that 439,000 Africans die every year from indoor air pollution because they are forced — for cooking, lighting, and heating — to burn charcoal and cattle dung, which one researcher compared to smoking 400 cigarettes per hour in the home. The reason Africans still use these primitive methods to generate energy is that green ideologues in rich nations won’t allow them to get financing to build coal-fired power stations.

                            Extreme environmentalism is an ideology that cares little for human life, even regards it as a blight on the Earth that should be reduced. Its instinctive sympathies are against our species. It wants less economic growth, less entrepreneurial spirit, less development, less energy, less safety, less food, less comfort.

                            Who suffers? Those in poor nations, of course, and we in the rich nations that impose our obsessions on ourselves and on others wherever we can.

                            But we can’t impose them everywhere. So, who doesn’t suffer? Our enemies, China in particular, that watch our self-harming foolishness with delight and perhaps a little astonishment. Beijing, which in recent years built more coal-fired power stations than the rest of the world combined, sits back and watches as the self-doubting, self-hating West cedes its prosperity and global leadership.

                            We’re now able, with our dazzling technology, to look billions of light years from the surface of our planet all the way to the rim of outer space and to peer back as far as the beginning of the universe. But here on Earth, we blind ourselves with ideology and cannot see what’s staring us in the face.


                            Source

                            © Copyright Original Source

                            Yeah, Post #11
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                              Yeah, Post #11
                              That's the second time in two weeks rogue has been behind the times like this. Old age catching up?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seer, Yesterday, 01:12 PM
                              4 responses
                              66 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 04-17-2024, 09:33 AM
                              45 responses
                              377 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Starlight  
                              Started by whag, 04-16-2024, 10:43 PM
                              60 responses
                              389 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
                              0 responses
                              27 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-16-2024, 06:47 AM
                              100 responses
                              449 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X