3 ms·
I think the point was that "but my sea view" is apparently only a problem when it comes to wind turbines, but petrochemical rigs that look like an overzealous c
by adhesive_wombat 3y ago
I think the point was that "but my sea view" is apparently only a problem when it comes to wind turbines, but petrochemical rigs that look like an overzealous chemical engineer-turned-modder's map from Unreal Tournament and bunker-fuel-powered floating skyscraper-sized hulks are not such a hot topic when it comes to seafront land values.
And, for the rigs, they are actually substantially closer to shore than turbines would be on the other coast, because, as you say, the ocean gets real deep, real fast there.
- lokar 3y agoI’ve never seen and controversy about it in CA, I think mostly due to the fact that the water is too deep. People do dislike the rigs, but new ones are banned and the ones off Santa Barbra are I think tapping a source that bubbles up on its own and washes ashore. So perhaps they are helping.
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoPlenty of people are trying to get rid of oil rigs in California. They aren’t allowing new ones anyways.
- notatoad 3y ago> "but my sea view" is apparently only a problem when it comes to wind turbines it's not that rich people don't mind oil rigs, it's that the power gradient goes oil companies -> rich people -> clean energy companies.
- adhesive_wombat 3y agoWell either the oil companies are suppressing the rich people complaints in the general discourse, or the relentless "concerns" about land values are oil-funded astroturfing intended to scare rich people with some sway to get on side against the turbines. Either prospect smells strongly of malfeasance to me.