Quote:
Originally Posted by justinstrife
Wind, Solar, and Water are not capable of supplying the needs of energy that we require, without the help of fossil fuels and nuclear power. So what pray tell, do you suggest we do?
|
Actually, that's only the case because the generating plants and storage stabilizers are not deployed. They're not deployed because the financials aren't quite there. As soon as the two vectors of cost/benefit intersect and solar/wind becomes cheaper (or less painful) than extracting the fossil fuels you'll see the energy industry spin like a dervish. Actually-we're already seeing the positioning in active gear.
In the Northwest, the power company in my area distributes power generation like this:
http://www.portlandgeneral.com/our_c...te_energy.aspx
21%hydro, 9%wind, 26%natural gas, 24%coal, 20% purchased from the inter-utility power grids. They have an active program developing geothermal power generation as well.
One should balance "maximization of profit" with "community supportive" .... something many corporations utterly fail at.
The only drag on the boat is that humans tend to get comfortable in certain frameworks... even if it is clear the framework is unsustainable. Not til they are uncomfortable do you see paradigm shifts. There is the additional complication of the scoundrel factor ("loot the treasury and soil the grain while the people are sandbagging the flood, its okay *I'll* get away"). There's nothing in a corporate charter about being a good team player in the community... its why they fail as "good citizens" without tight oversight from the community. Naturally, the corporations will attempt to corrupt that process and install overseers more friendly to them than to the community. Back and forth it goes...