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: Bearcatbob who wrote (252607)	12/29/2007 6:23:41 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"spend the money for a dual capacity. Boy - that would get expensive" You may be surprised to know that it is already done. Most utilities have plants they only use during the day to satisfy peak demand. Most have plants they only fire up a few times a year for high peak demand. Often these are natural gas fired so they come on line quickly and be shut down quickly. The technology for energy storage keep improving so they can charge a mega bank of batteries during the day and discharge it at night. The possible environmental impact of replacing batteries would have to be considered. Hawaii is a special case and it is possible that geothermal might be a great supplement to wind.

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (252607)	12/30/2007 12:26:03 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Coal gasification is a very expensive process. I think we only have 3 or 4 utilities in this country that have some kind of adjunct facility in use right now. Tampa electric comes to mind. I suspect that the output of a utility company can be increased more efficiently and cheaply by adding solar capacity to the existing plant as is done in parts of Europe. Europe has given us an alternative energy roadmap of sorts. All sorts of technologies are being developed and used and the cost per watt is coming down. Solar, wind, geothermal, even battery powered public buses. Solar is the most functional in that it can be easily added to existing infrastructure. For ex. large buildings....business or apartment.....that can cover their rooftops with solar panels. Many have such excess power capacity that can be sold back into the grid that their ROI is actually quite high. In this country we lack the political will and we are in a weaker position financially to subsidize the transition to alternative energy technologies. The EU member countries as a group are financially stronger, i.e. lower debt to GDP ratios, and they are in better shape financially to 'digest' the coming retirement costs of their aging populations. Add to that the fact that there is no unity of opinion on the NEED for alternative energy...it's actually a very polarizing topic among the electorate. So for all these reasons, my guess is the US will continue to lag regardless of which party controls the White House. These were the reasons given for the recent passage of a watered down energy bill in Congress. As an investor, I hate to see this state of affairs because I think we're missing business opportunites in this country. For ex., two substantial solar facilites were built this year....one outside Las Vegas and the other on the California border which will feed into the CA grid, I believe. One was built by an Italian company and the other was built by an Israeli company. We did get the construction jobs, I presume, but the corporate revenues went out of country.