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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win Smith who wrote (135507)	6/3/2004 6:20:56 PM
From: Valley Girl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Agreed on geothermal - there's just not enough sites good enough for large scale use, though I agree with the previous post that it will work as a (small) part of a checkerboard solution. I've heard the economic argument against nuclear power before, and it's hard to accept. I can't help thinking that a lot of the "cost" is actually caused by delays and red tape as activists do everything possible to block construction. If a construction project that's supposed to take 2 years takes 10 instead, that delays the payoff enough to make a huge difference in ROI terms; during the time the project's delayed, you effectively have capital tied up in an asset that's not producing anything. If new shopping malls were opposed with anything like the same ferocity, they too could be rendered "uneconomic". But hey, don't believe me - the best argument I have are the Japanese and French programs. France gets 78% of her electricity from nukes, and is a net exporter of electricity. That's a pretty good indication that it's practical.

To: Win Smith who wrote (135507)	6/3/2004 7:01:28 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi WinSmith! As an advocate of geothermal, California is the world's largest producer. We shouldn't diss any part of the solution. Wind is great. So is tidal - a form of hydroelectric - and we have barely scratched that. Electrolytic production of H2 at elevated temperatures (~600 degC, I believe) is so efficient that is roughly comparable to battery storage. My view of this is that government seeds investment by nurturing these industries with tax breaks. You'd see Exxon-Mobil running for them if they got a 5 year profit window with no taxation. Let's give it a try.

To: Win Smith who wrote (135507)	6/3/2004 7:01:31 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 281500

Geeze Win, you sound like the we're gonna run out of any kind of energy person. And it's the fault of conservatives. Care to give a positive solution?