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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (45739)	9/9/2010 1:21:05 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

So what do you call these statements of yours'? An odd question. I don't give my statements names, they are what they are, the name would be the statement or it would not completly categorize the statement. Either the wind is going to replace nothing, in which case it does little good, or its going to replace coal.... (I still can't make any sense out of that one! <g>) Its a rather simple statement. What throws you about it? "Replace nothing"? That's another way of saying "does not replace anything". In this context it would mean you would mean that if you needed X production capacity without wind power, you would still build X non-wind capacity when you have wind power. Wind power can not cost effectively be one of the major players for the foreseeable future. ALL asserted without benefit of any supporting calculations.... All strongly supported. All with the assumption that wind doesn't generate near its capacity for much of the time, and that you can't count on it being ready to produce at high capacity when you need it, but no calculations are needed to show that, its basic to wind power, and well know by anyone who isn't totally ignorant in this area. Re: "Which is why I say wind power doesn't work well as a major source of electricity." All technologies have strengths and weaknesses. If COST is your highest valued criteria then nuclear doesn't look very good at all. Cost concerns can change. Nuclear can get cheaper, or other sources can get more expensive. Wind powers problems aren't just cost (where the balance could also change for wind making it more favorable), but inability to either steadily produce a large and predictable amount of electricity (so you can use it as the base), or to reliably produce electricity at moments of extra need (so you can use it for peaking power). As a niche source that's not much of an issue. As a major source, it needs to be able to perform one function or the other, or you have to retain the full capacity in other methods, building fossil fuel plants to back up your wind production, or you have to accept an unreliable electrical grid.