Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cdcox
If it all comes to pass we will make adjustments to the situation. Human's are remarkably adaptable.
And the idea that everyone will be generating their own power is just ludicrous. Here on campus they have demo wind/solar unit. The people who sponsored it were disappointed that on what they considered a windy day (think breezey) that the wind mill wasn't really turning. It takes a lot of wind to drive a windmill. The solar units were not efficient enough to keep the batteries at the site charged. Once you are generating enough power for your house and to recharge your electric car and are completely disconnected from the grid, you can tell me about your experiences and maybe I'll listen then.
When you start advocating the construction of hundereds of new nuclear plants, I'll consider that you are serious about CO2 emissions. If we are going to shift our energy supply away from fossil fuels, nuclear is the only current enery source that will be able to bear the burden. Some other technologies such as wind can contribut 10 to 20%, but nuclear will lead the way.
|
I have little problem with Nuclear Plants. But new technologies can be inplimented. Dual grid systems one lower voltage for lighting say. Houses have been built very tightly that can be heated by just the water heater. But the cost can't be brought down and the energy production reduced unless there is a concerted effort. You want to discount the needed change instead of looking for solutions. You are still grounded in Adam Smith mentality in an information age economy. (Not that scarcity doesn't play a part but that we generate novel solutions with our scientific understandings).
This in face of the reality of the effects of greenhouse gases. There have been plenty of times that resilency and been exceeded and the result is dire.