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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jmhollen who wrote (535097)	2/4/2004 12:46:49 PM
From: Krowbar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

< Wind Energy is much more costly and no where near as efficient as anaerobic digestion that converts manure, wet garbage, switch grass, damaged crops, and any other digestible bio-substance into readily usable methane biogas. The end product of AD is a perfect soil amendment/fertilizer highly desired by farmers, nurserymen, golf courses and the like. > In the early 1980's, when the first utility-scale wind turbines were installed, wind-generated electricity cost as much as 30 cents per kilowatt-hour. Now, state-of-the-art wind power plants at excellent sites are generating electricity at less than 5 cents/kWh. Costs are continuing to decline as more and larger plants are built and advanced technology is introduced. awea.org What needs to be compared is wind to Cheney's beloved coal. What is never mentioned in coal generation cost is the cost of the damage downwind to people's health and crop and building damage, not to mention the long term effects of global warming. I am totally in favor of anaerobic digestion, but energy production costs are hard to determine because there are no consistent large scale projects. Even more promising is thermo-depolymerization, a process by which waste materials are broken down by intensive heat and pressure to produce natural gas, fuel oil, and minerals. I am watching this very closely, as I will invest in companies that exploit this new technology. news.nationalgeographic.com < Wind energy is not dependable - even in high wind areas, while AD works 24/7/360 reducing odors, destroying pathogens, and making clean grean energy and fertilzer. > You are comparing apples to oranges. Why must it be either or? Wind energy is contributing 10% of the electrical demand in some European countries without the problems that were expected. They are planning on increasing that to 20% in some places. < Get a grip. Fuel cells, other than for small applications, are also a joke cost and efficiency-wise. > Fuel cells are very efficient energy-wise, but still costly. The costs are expected to drop with mass production like anything else. < That shows just how stupid the Demoncrats are. If you want "..whizbang techno-BS..", ask a know-nothing Demoncrat - they'll throw money at anything Hillary tells them to; the more stupid the better....!!! > Then Warren buffet and many others involved in the productuion of energy are stupid too. He is going to build a huge wind farm in Iowa, and is also involved in funding the depolymerization process described above. Contrast this with Cheney's dream of building a new power plant a week, mostly coal, for the next 20 years, and his contempt for energy efficiency and renewables. Try thinking objectively for yourself and doing independent researh on the subject yourself, rather than parroting right wing idealogies promoted by Rush Limbaugh trained goose steppers. Del