by globalrev on 10/3/08, 3:24 AM with 5 comments
And then put all energy-research into solarpower to replace nuclear power when there is a major breakthrough?
I'm hardly an expert but it seems most other alternatives are either not viable or they are just a trade-off.
by dkokelley on 10/3/08, 3:41 AM
Disclaimer: These are not necessarily my views, but views I believe others hold.
A: Nuclear energy is dangerous and a terrorism threat (political)
B: Electric vehicles are not practical (market) and there is a ton of money in oil (market) and our relationship to the oil providers is frail (political)
C: Wind energy is not very profitable (market) or practical (market) because the technology isn't there to harness it efficiently
I agree with most of my market reasons, but the political ones I think are unfounded.
I also think that there is a great reward awaiting those who find a way to make electric vehicles and wind power practical and profitable (and a great deal of headache awaiting those who attempt to change the political aspect of energy).
by etal on 10/3/08, 4:06 AM
But yes, nuclear power stands a better chance of being able to fully replace fossil fuels than most of the other options in the next few decades.
by hs on 10/4/08, 5:23 AM
with solar, it's decentralized ... loss should be minimal ... maybe no need for AC converters ... can u directly use DC ?