Posted by: Thalean
Posting time: 3.5 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 9/6/2017 10:00:00 AM
Views: 673
SCP: 18
22 upvotes, 4 downvotes (85% upvoted it)
~1 user(s) here now
NSFW: No
Authorized: No
Anon: No
Private: No
Type: Default
view the rest of the comments →
[–] StuffThatSandwich 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago (edited ago)
Oh really? So this thing does the work of 88,200 trees. Remind me, how much space do 88,200 trees require. Well, let's ignore that that varies with the tree's final size for a moment, and go with the smallest figure I could find in a minute of googling, which is 2.5m apart.
How much space does this plant take up? I can't find a figure in the article, but it sure looks like it's a heck of a lot smaller than 220 square km.
So something that does the work of the only other current option in a minuscule fraction of the space is the, "the worst idea that liberal environmentalists have ever had—or ever will have"?
k, sounds good to me?
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm#intro
Thanks for your shitty opinion Spencer P Morrison, it goes along well with your shit journalism.
l o l
There's so much more going wrong in this fucking travesty, but that's all the time I'm willing to shit all over this.
How does fucking garbage like this article gain a single upvoat?