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

To: TimF who wrote (62675)	4/30/2008 8:07:28 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541785

>>Wind (even more than solar) is unlikely to be more than a minor contributor. If your serious about avoiding fossil fuel use for electricity generation, than I think we need to build quite a few nuclear plants.<< Tim - Nuclear plants are very expensive to build, and it takes a long time to build them. In fact, the costs are increasing, and so are lead times for the parts and raw materials. So nuclear energy is not the panacea some would like to believe it is. Solar thermal plants can be built in less time, and will never produce toxic waste. Plus they can use thermal storage techniques to allow them to generate electricity even at night, and can be hybridized to use other fuel sources when necessary. Another advantage of solar power generation is that it doesn't have to be centralized. - Allen