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.
Politics : Politics of Energy
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (5317)2/26/2009 7:03:12 AM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (1) of 86352
 
Listen.. what I want are incentives to invest in LONG-TERM power generation capacity, which nuclear has proven itself to be (40 years+). I have little, if any, confidence in the long-term reliability/availability of either wind or solar. I fear that wind turbines might have to be completely replaced after only 10-20 years and probably 20-30 years for solar.

Solar is becoming increasing efficient. So it's not an entirely bad thing that the systems going in today will have to be replaced in 30 years.... in fact if efficiency increases enough it might make sense to replace them much earlier.

And of course, as I've often discussed, neither wind or solar are BASELINE power.

Yes, nukes and natural gas make sense where they make sense. Solar and wind make sense where they make sense. And a smart grid really makes sense.

I don't understand why you always sound so irritated.
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