posts: 340695
Data license: Public Domain
This data as json
| post_id | thread_id | thread_title | post_number | author_username | post_date | post_date_iso | post_body |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 340695 | 21050 | Gutting NOAA | 84 | Bryce | Mar 14, 2025 | 2025-03-14T14:29:57-0400 | seabird said: Thanks for the classy reply Spiral. Not picking on you or the comment as it was just a profit example, and a good one at that, but you did mention fossil fuels… so would you say that offshore wind turbines are a better alternative? NOAA has a massive hand in developing wind turbines at sea… completely decimating wildlife, and the natural world aesthetics. If NOAA is such a treasure and a wealth of knowledge, why would they be pushing, funding and developing such a thing? Surely they know it's terrible for the environment.? Surely they would never be corrupted by the promise of grants and new funding..? Click to expand... Offshore wind is more BOEM than NOAA. I've worked on projects to protect areas all along the West Coast from offshore mining and wind energy developments. There is more of an emphasis on conservation and sustainable management of resources than pure exploitation. The new Chumash National Marine Sanctuary (managed by NOAA) is a good example. The debate of how to preserve vs utilize natural resources is a long and tired debate. |