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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (45559)9/6/2010 3:23:20 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
No reversal or conflict at all, just a reasonable examination of the role of wind power if we every try to make it a major source.

Either the wind is going to replace nothing, in which case it does little good, or its going to replace coal, in which case you either have to shift gas to baseline power which raises costs a lot, or you have blackouts when the wind doesn't blow, or its going to replace gas power, in which case you have coal supplemented by wind; but you need to keep extra coal capacity around since the wind isn't reliable, and you either have to keep some of that capacity operating when it isn't needed, or you have to shut it on and off a lot, either of which will use extra fuel, incur extra cost, and reduce, potentially even eliminate the advantage in terms of pollution emissions and CO2 emissions.

Or you could just keep wind at niche power levels. Then you probably do get a reduction in CO2 and pollution, if not a really huge one.

You have some other scenario that works? Lay it out.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News