theme is "Green Man" this year. Ginormous Green Man gets set on fire. I wonder how much toxic smoke and CO2 gets released?
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
-
Re: irony
Fri, August 24, 2007 - 9:48 AMPlus, the irony of a green man (representation of nature) being burned. What does *that* say about their festival? -
-
Re: irony
Fri, August 24, 2007 - 7:46 PMThey reused a lot of old lead & mercury based paints to make the man this year.
Reduce reuse recycle!
--S -
-
Re: irony
Sun, August 26, 2007 - 1:56 PMDoes this mean they aren't going to waste thousands of gallons of irreplaceable fossil fuels to create fire art? -
-
Re: irony
Tue, August 28, 2007 - 8:34 AMThey're going to add a lot of copper dust into the burn to make the flames green.
--S -
-
Re: irony
Tue, August 28, 2007 - 6:02 PMI'm not a chemist. Why does this sound bad? -
-
Re: irony
Tue, August 28, 2007 - 9:15 PMPerhaps they will just prance around will a glow stick up their arses and spin glow sticks
and thus attain the Nirvana that only Green Man can sell them ! -
-
fucktards
Wed, August 29, 2007 - 3:03 AMlook at this bullshit, i love "carbon offsetting"
how about not burning the shit in the first place losers.
BM sinks to new low and uses the same fake environmentalism as BP, Exxon mobil, etc
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But we will do much more than this. In 2007, we will calculate the amount of climate changing gases that are released into the air by the construction and the burning of the Man and its pedestal. This is called a carbon footprint. Then we'll sponsor projects in the outside world that will efface this imprint. Such actions might include the planting of trees or the development of non-polluting energy resources. Having played with fire, we'll take care to cleanse its atmospheric playground. -
-
Re: fucktards
Wed, August 29, 2007 - 10:55 AMRegarding copper to make green flames: we've done that in pyrotechnics for years, it's not so bad. Might not want to directly inhale the smoke coming off it, but compared to everything else inhaled there ....
Sure, burning the man creates pollution, but just think of how much petrol is used to power all those trucks hauling tons of gear from around the country and then (most of it) back home. I'm wondering how that might compare to say, a NASCAR event. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: fucktards
Wed, August 29, 2007 - 1:51 PMthe big difference being a bunch of NASCAR jackoffs don't care about the environment,
and would admit it, and not pretend they are so "green"
-
-
Re: fucktards
Wed, August 29, 2007 - 1:57 PM
>> the big difference... NASCAR jackoffs don't care about the environment...would admit it... not pretend they are so "green"
werd!
-
-
-
Re: fucktards
Thu, August 30, 2007 - 5:42 AM"But we will do much more than this. In 2007, we will calculate the amount of climate changing gases that are released into the air by the construction and the burning of the Man and its pedestal. This is called a carbon footprint. Then we'll sponsor projects in the outside world that will efface this imprint. Such actions might include the planting of trees or the development of non-polluting energy resources. Having played with fire, we'll take care to cleanse its atmospheric playground."
This is like dumping Nuclear waste in the ocean and panting a tree an Alaska and saying that they somehow offset each other.
--S
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: fucktards
Thu, August 30, 2007 - 11:07 AM>>>>This is like dumping Nuclear waste in the ocean and panting a tree an Alaska and saying that they somehow offset each other. <<<<
AWESOME! i was just telling a friend last night how planting a tree in Mexico isn't going to do shit for the air over LA.
freaking burnt out burners
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
