Wind Farm Slaughter

[Justin Spencer]

Problem is Justin they don't turn day and night and even while they're turning the power plants are burning fuel. You can't start and start a fuel burning power plant. They have to keep the water hot 24/7. There's no doubt we need alternatives, but wind power is a poor one and as long as they continue to get the lions share of financial help better alternatives won't come about. You talk about trips and windmill farms, you can go to the west coast and not see a power plant, but the same can't be said for windmills.

I wonder how you would feel if you had to hear and see them as part of your permanent landscape.

Wind power is one piece of the green power movement, green power is not the easiest or cheapest way to get power but for those who care about the future of our planet it IS the future like it or not. Quit complaining about it and come up with a better idea if you think you have the answers. I would much rather look at a windmill than all these cell towers that seem to be popping up on every hilltop in the Ozarks, but I guess we have to see them in the name of progress, same can be said for those who find windmills ugly.

And by the way, communication towers kill about 7 million birds per year.

[Jerry Rapp]

I believe nuclear and hydrogen is what is going to be the power source of the future. We have enough fossil fuels to last us 200+ years while they develop, in probably less than 50 yrs if they are allowed to develop. 100 yrs ago we were driving model A's to go fishing, now look at what we have. In another 100 years, the F-150 will be a model A. Or T. Seriously, I would be putting our "incentive" money into these instead of solar, wind, electric cars.

[dgames]

My understanding is that one of the biggest problems with wind power is that it produces power when it is least needed. From a number of presentations that I have seen, wind produces near its nameplate capacity at night when electric demand is low yet contributes very little on hot summer days when the electric grid experiences its peak demand. As a result, conventional generation facilities have to remain in place to keep the lights on during peak demand periods and then is forced to sit idle during lower demand periods.

[Justin Spencer]

I think much of the future should revolve around individual power production. Lets say we require a percentage of your new construction cost must be spent on either solar or wind with each new system being tied to the grid. This could very quickly relieve the stress on current power plants and after a few years would be as accepted as other building codes that were once scoffed at. This won't come close to producing all the power that we need, but it will use space that otherwise is wasted to produce clean electricity while promoting personal responsibility instead of government handouts.

[stlfisher]

Personally, I think Solar will eventually be the way to go. Put the solar panel's in orbit above the earth. Once NASA figure's out how to transport the energy from space effectively you have an unlimited supply of clean energy free from atmospheric distruption on earth.

It is not easy to transport that kind of energy, but withing the next 50-100 years we should be able to figure it out.

[ness]

I think much of the future should revolve around individual power production.

Like this?

[Wayne SW/MO]

Solar does have more promise if it was utilized right. While lighting isn't a large percentage of the load, it is universal enough to make an impact. Most roofs are vacant and could easily be used for preheating water and solar panes for lighting. Solar panels could be produced cheaply enough if they got the attention they deserve.

Nuclear is probably the quickest way to clean energy. Nuclear is saddled with a few accidents caused by either poor engineering or apathy for safety, but can be safe. One of the big drawbacks is disposal of spent fuel and I've never understood why it couldn't be jettisoned into space? Surely it could be package to withstand a failure.

For wind it still comes back to the fact it's saddled with cons and the only large pro is the subsidies corporations a sucking out of the research dollar.

Natural gas is much cleaner than coal, but Wyoming and Pennsylvania have a lot of coal to sell, so it isn't really all about clean energy. Homage has to be paid to the bottom line first.

[Justin Spencer]

Like this?

That's exactly what I'm talkin' about, if the skipper can do it so can we!

[Terrierman]

Like this?

Looks like a job for little buddy to me.

[Justin Spencer]

Looks like a job for little buddy to me.

That's because you look a little like the skipper!