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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (61884)4/26/2008 3:35:35 PM
From: Cogito  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541875
 
>>I think you're reading something into that. Saying that wind and solar will provide only a fraction of our needs for decades doesn't seem to me to imply what you infer. It seems to say just what you said, "Sure, wind and solar will most likely only provide a fraction of our energy over the next couple of decades." There's enough disagreement around without adding to it through inference.<<

Karen -

Here's exactly what the author said, which I quoted. I'll add my own emphasis this time, which will make what he is saying plainer.

"What, then, is the least pernicious alternative — and the most environmentally, financially and ethically sound? Unfortunately, for a while longer it is not just to trust in promising new technologies like wind and solar power; for decades to come, these will only provide a fraction of our energy needs.

"Instead, aside from greater conservation, we must develop more traditional energy resources at home. That would mean building more nuclear power plants, intensifying efforts at mining and burning coal more cleanly — and developing more domestic oil, while retooling our vehicles to be even lighter and more fuel-efficient."

The author clearly states that solar and wind are not the answer, and that traditional energy sources are. I'm not just inferring that, he's stating it plainly. He's saying that the most environmentally, financially, and ethically sound alternative is to mine more coal, build more coal plants, and build nuke plants.

This ignores the fact that it takes time to build coal plants and nuke plants, and that solar and wind plants offering equivalent output could be constructed in no more than the same amount of time. Probably less.

Where the author and I agree is that any effort we make to increase our energy supply must be coupled with intensive efforts to make vehicles more fuel-efficient. Plug-in hybrids, fully electric cars, and that sort of thing, would help tremendously overall. The Detroit auto makers will just have to get over their resistance to building smaller, more fuel-efficient cars, and the American public will have to get over their addiction to SUVs. At this point, gas prices will naturally aid that process.

- Allen