I remember cranking an eyebrow at this when it first went up.
Not so much for the materials, but the energy required to lift water up and drop it down.
Now it seems there may be another reason to think one's eco-ware artform through a tad better before making one's point (plus laods of PR & wonga):
NYC Waterfall Installations Might be Killing Trees
Hmmn.
I remember when these first went up wondering what was the energy source used to elevate large volumes of water artificially up to drop down.
I asked a similar question of an 'eco-wareness' installation in some Nordic capital that involved lighting all the buildings up in colours to reflect 'moods' as I recall.
Apparently, as it was night, demand was low. So that's OK then.
There's a certain irony that falling water is often used to generate energy.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.