Politics of Energy Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Politics of Energy

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (5203)	2/23/2009 6:29:59 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) of 86352

I thought energy independence and no GHG's was supposed to be a benefit? Guess its only a benefit for things we don't use much now. Come on you are not that politically naive. Or maybe you are. Nukes (I am not against nukes) have to be sold as much as wind and solar. As I've said many times, if people on this thread could get past the ideology they would be in more agreement than disagreement. Considering that massive use of these would need massive investments in transmission facilities and energy storage facilities and backup NG plants .... nah. The obvious difference is that you can add solar (or even wind) on a small, incremental basis. As we discussed and you recognized, nuke plants take a huge financial commitment, all of it upfront with long, long lead times. Instead of making an argument we might discuss how to solve the nuke plant finance problem. They already get government subsidies, including guarantees on the loans (I believe). So how do you make them work with (or without) additional government subsidies?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next