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: Triffin who wrote (62723)	5/1/2008 6:29:39 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541921

>>So nuclear energy is not the panacea some would like to believe it is. Except for the fact that the plants run 24/7 at full rated power ..<< Triff - That doesn't change the fact that nuclear plants are still expensive to build, that they take a long time to build, and that those factors are both increasing. Besides, power consumption isn't flat around the clock, so running at full rated power at all times is not necessarily an advantage. ""Realistically, we'll eventually have to go 75% nukes and 25% renewables; otherwise it's going to be a long ugly slide down the backside of the fossil fuels depletion curve ..<< I might quibble with your ratios, but that essential point is a very good one. We need some form of sustainable energy. Coal, natural gas, and oil aren't sustainable. Our solutions have to come from within the remaining choices. - Allen