Environmental perspective

I'm a little irritated at the environmentalists to say the least. Now I consider myself an environmentalist. In other words, I'm an environmental conservative and want to see it preserved and carefully managed. However, some of the decisions being made and executed are touted as being "environmental" but are not. Here are two examples, hybrid and electric cars and wind mills. Let me give you some reasons why:

1. Car batteries is the first example, and there are a lot of them with all the hybrids being manufactured. Do you know where they put all these batteries when they're exhausted? Are they going to put them in the land fill? After all, batteries are a hazardous waste. They have to put them someplace. And, car batteries will take up far more space than spent nuclear fuel.

2. Re-chargeable batteries in hybrids and electric cars are made of nickel and cadmium. Where does that come from? It comes from mines, many of which are in Colorado. That doesn't sound very "sustainable" to me. In other words; like oil, we'll eventually run out of the stuff. What then? Auto makers are also turning to lithium. Half of the world's supply of lithium comes from Bolivia. Lithium is used in computer batteries because it holds more energy in a lighter, smaller space. However, it is not sustainable. In other words, there is not an unlimited supply. With Toyota now having sold over 1 million Prius' autos, GM and others are making more hybrids and electrics, where will it all end? Also, did you know that lithium plants produce sulfer dioxide, not good for the environment.

3. What about molybdenum oxide? Mined at Henderson mines, Urad, and Climax, all in Colorado (Henderson being the world's largest producer). Do you know what molybdenum oxide is used for (besides being an alloy agent for aircraft metal)? It's used to strengthen wind mills used to create energy. They're so big they need strengthening. Does that sound sustainable? What happens when we run out of molybdenum? Like oil, it will put an end to wind mills. Oh yea, China and Iran have molybdenum too (maybe we'll be dependent on them in 20 years for a supply of it instead of middle eastern countries for oil).

Abandoned mines are another problem in Colorado. Un-mined mineral deposits and mine dumps (ore and rock removed to get to ore deposits), and tailings (material left over after the ore processing), all contribute to environmental problems in Colorado. My home state. These contaminate the surrounding watershed and often create conditions so acidic that fish and aquatic insects can't survive.

Also, did I mention that cadmium toxicity level in birds is off the charts now in Colorado and it makes brittle bones in birds. Studies have found this to be the case in central Colorado. Read the links. My point is, the environmentalists make such a big deal about the horrible effects of drilling in Alaska, yet they tolerate the destruction of entire mountains in Colorado, and the killing of birds and fish in Colorado?

I recognize the need for good sources of renewable energy. Electric cars and wind mills aren't renewable and do create environmental problems. I would also submit to you that coal is worse environmentally than nuclear energy. But, that's another topic for later. At least nuclear would buy us some time to develop sustainable sources such as hydrogen cars and geo-thermal. My point is, cash for clunkers to get environmentally sound vehicles is not the truth. It's just bad politics.