Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (125787)	1/22/2001 7:59:56 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: What are the benefits and risks of solar plants? They cost an awful lot to build, but in the present low interest rate environment, that's less of an issue than it used to be (the same thing goes for Nuclear plants). The other problem with solar power is its intermittent nature, so it can only supplement other forms of power unless pump up or flywheel storage capacity is put into place equal to the amount of solar capacity built. The danger associated with solar power is the risk of ruining beautiful hilltop views by covering them with windmills, that and freezing to death if it stays cloudy for a long time. :-) Dan

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (125787)	1/22/2001 10:32:50 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 186894

Tenchusatsu, What are the benefits and risks of solar plants? Seems like even a few more solar power plants in California would be better than no new plants at all, right? I think the solar power plants would be fine on Sahara desert, where no one ever goes to, there is no vegetation, basically no life. But in places like California, they would just take too much room, they are not very efficient, and huge areas of wilderness / farms would have to be ruined by these fairly ugly objects. There are much better ways to generate electricity, mainly nuclear, that don't take much space, generate HUGE amount of electricity. I guess the ratio of electricity generated vs. environmental contamination (space taken, visual "contamination" etc) can't be matched by any other source of electricity. The wind and solar electricity generation is a good utopia for environmentalists, but it just doesn't add up match the demand for electricity. We would probably have to cut all the forests, or take up all the farmland to supply enough electricity for the country, and that's a tradeoff no one in their right mind is going to make. Joe