Darryl Hannah: ‘We need to move away from ‘toxic’ to ‘clean’ energy because you can’t not believe in toxins’ — RealityDrop: Solar and wind ‘pollute’ too

Posted on April 10, 2013 by Steve Milloy | 1 Comment

Darryl Hannah described her decision to produce the warmist documentary Greedy Lying Bastards as a “no-brainer.” She was clearly qualified.

Actress Darryl Hannah told Canadian media today:

“We still need to move away from these lethal, toxic forms of energy that are destroying our life-support systems, so clean energy is still the answer whether you believe in the climate crisis or not, because you can’t not believe in toxins, you know?”

Earth to Darryl: So-called clean energy production necessarily involves “toxins” and hazardous waste.

My Take – This should be titled “Dumb as dirt!” – or – “There Really Is Alien Life Among Us!”  One thing we know for sure.  It is a good thing she makes her living by reciting the words others have written.  Otherwise....she would make even fewer movies than she does now and would end up as a financial burden on the taxpayers.  I would also like to draw your attention to the 'brilliance' of Daryl Hannah that I posted on Thursday, September 1, 2011  The Crude Logic of Daryl Hannah

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently promised that the Obama administration would finally make a decision on whether or not to permit construction of a new pipeline that would deliver Canadian crude oil to the United States. The Keystone-XL pipeline would create jobs, provide a significant and stable new source of oil and give the economy a badly-needed shot in the arm. So, naturally, environmentalists are outraged by the plan….calling on the administration to stop the pipeline, which would eventually deliver over 800,000 barrels of crude per day to refineries in Texas. To put that in context, the United States currently consumes about 18,000,000 barrels per day of petroleum products, so 800,000 barrels is a substantial number……the crude that will flow through the pipeline originates in the tar sands of Alberta. It is “dirtier” (in the sense that it has more contaminants that must be removed) than “sweet” crude. Because it’s dirtier, environmentalists claim that refineries will pollute more when processing it.

Refineries are subject to a plethora of standards that limit the amount of pollutants they can release into the air and into the water. None of these standards is based on the type of crude oil that a refinery processes. The EPA does not care if a refinery is processing the sweetest crude available or if it’s processing crude so foul that it’s sometimes called “dinosaur dung” in the trade. The limits are the limits……. crude from the tar sands will be held to the same standards to which they have always been held. So rather than polluting more, refineries that process dirtier crude have to improve their processes in order to handle them and still meet pollution limits. This modernization process has already begun…….See Hollywood Free Service: Answers to All Questions