Quote:
The main downside is that the source is not constant. Solar is guaranteed to be out of service 1/2 of the year, [nighttime], plus during cloudy weather. Wind is erratic, at best, and unless you can get 100' above the treetops, anywhere, it's useless. Then, there's the cost of battery storage, or a second source of power, if you are off the grid.
Remember the NIMBY's [Not in my backyard] in Mass. They didn't want their ocean view messed up with windmills, which had a constant source of wind.
Nuclear is the way to go. Once it's established, it's cheap, effecient, and is already a proven technology, but again, we have the NIMBY's who worry about growing a second head, due to radiation exposure.
The main downside is that the source is not constant. Solar is guaranteed to be out of service 1/2 of the year, [nighttime], plus during cloudy weather. Wind is erratic, at best, and unless you can get 100' above the treetops, anywhere, it's useless. Then, there's the cost of battery storage, or a second source of power, if you are off the grid.
Remember the NIMBY's [Not in my backyard] in Mass. They didn't want their ocean view messed up with windmills, which had a constant source of wind.
Nuclear is the way to go. Once it's established, it's cheap, effecient, and is already a proven technology, but again, we have the NIMBY's who worry about growing a second head, due to radiation exposure.