« How Much??!!!?!?!!?!?? | Main | Gore (and More) in Newsweek »

December 02, 2008

Comments

David Byrnes

Check out this article:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_37/b3950067_mz018.htm

companies have been trying to install sustainable, cost efficient solar cells for quite a while now; that article is from 2005.

I'm a very enthusiastic proponent of solar and nuclear energy for this country. More alternative energy solutions are always better, but from what I've read about wind and water energy, they don't seem as cost efficient due to more difficult installation procedures.

John Mooney

David, it's my view that we'll need to explore every one of these technologies in order to make the reductions in carbon-based fuels we need if we are to have any chance of avoiding catastrophic climate disruptions.

That includes nuclear systems, as long as we accurately mark the costs of storing waste virtually indefinitely (including the plants themselves when they wear out, a cost we have yet to see in grand scale), and the cost of securing hundreds of wildly attractive terrorist targets. We'll also need to know the realistic fuel prospects for nuclear generation at the scale that we're talking about - I've seen studies that show that if nuclear generation were scaled to produce the amount of juice produced by coal in the US, we'd be out of uranium in three years.

The scale problem is truly staggering, and will require a total effort, or we're done for. It's not just "which one is best", because we'll need them all.

The comments to this entry are closed.