SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Alternative energy
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rock_nj who wrote (1097)7/25/2004 10:44:51 AM
From: Stephen O  Read Replies (1) of 16955
 
I totally disagree with you. Wind itself has been subsidized directly and how many wind towers will it take to replace a nuke? There was a recent report from Scotland about this. Find it by googling. How much steel in a wind tower with steel at record prices? Coal has gotten by in the past because the pollution scrubbers were never 100% and coal produces tons of CO2. Also a coal power plant produces more radiation than a nuke because the burning ofcoal releases minute amounts of Uranium into the air.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News