Aren’t Solar Panels & Wind Mills a JOKE?
Think about it. If Solar and Wind would work everywhere in the USA the Private Sector would Fund it as it would be a money maker. Hmmm No Private Sector wants to go near Solar and Wind and that is why our Government HAS to Fund it with our Tax Dollars.
Also, in the USA like Seattle which gets a tremendous amount of Rain which means no sun and no wind, how will it work there?
What about in other States where Hurricanes & Tornadoes are normal, Hail is normal, snow is normal etc……
How much is your Home Owners Insurance going to be to insure Wind Mills/Solar Panels once mother Nature destroys them?
WHERE are all the Cables/Wires going to be STORED FOR WIND MILLS not to mention all the Containers ?
Question:
Shouldn’t WE look into this further before ruining our Country with it and start using our own Natural Resources and Nuclear which is clean?
__________________________
ck4829 : reading your answer reminds me of what a POOR JOB the Republicans have to done to expose the propaganda you have written.
Education is Key to understanding and it’s Propaganda and Sound bites that have not allowed the USA to use it’s natural resources in a clean way.
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
18 comments
Nathan on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
Solar and wind technology isn’t advanced enough for this. Maybe in a few decades…
Paul Grass on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
Yes as you say it would have been implemented and by now Don Quote would have been fighting them
ck4829 on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
"start using our own Natural Resources"
Translation: Let’s let big oil buy up all the other oil fields (Not just the 68 million acres) and then let them sit on them and do no drilling on them at all for several years. That is somehow less of a joke than solar and wind energy.
"Nuclear which is clean"
Hahahahahaha!
Hambone on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
As for you question at the bottom, we should be using all of our possible resources… our natural resources (if anything as a supplement to our current use of foreign imports), nuclear, solar, wind, and lets not forget water! But yes, all options should be looked into further before mass deployment.
_______________________________________
Look if you have a problems with oil companies using the land and making a profit from it, do the smart thing and invest in their companies!
Seldon Surak II on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
ABSOLUTELY NOT
LOOK UP THE FIGURES FOR GERMANY
They compliment each other perfectly.
Solar in good weather.
Wind in bad weather.
And nuclear to fill in any gaps.
Stony on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
The Private Sector has a sweet, billion-dollar set-up right now without alternative energy, so there is little if any motivation for them to invest.
If you don’t understand how it would work in places like Seattle, then what qualifies you to conclude that it isn’t valid technology?
Will on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
You really haven’t researched this much have you?
Wicked Wanda on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
No.
This is a joke.
A driver is stuck in a traffic jam going into downtown Chicago. Nothing is moving north or south. Suddenly a man knocks on his window.
The driver rolls down his window and asks, "What happened, what’s the hold up?". "Terrorists have just kidnapped Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Rosie O’Donnell, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. They are asking for a $10 million dollar ransom or they are going to douse them with gasoline and set them on fire." "We are going from car to car, taking up a collection." The driver asked "On average, how much is everyone giving?" The man replied "About a gallon."
But in regards to your "question".
If you seriously think the technology and intelligence doesn’t already exist to make this world less dependent on the ever depleting oil in our world than you are obviously one of the more easily fooled humans.
Lordpercywooster on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
the highly radioactive waste that is dangerous for 250 000 years is clean?
so destroying the wilderness and replacing it with man made polluting structures, is not ruining it?
you picked up the wrong end of the telescope
short and to the point on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
there are many homes in the southwest that are now off the grid by using solar power. the capitol building had solar panels installed when carter was in office. reagan had them ripped out because he did not believe in using solar power.
wind power is now at work in many areas around the country.
Floyd on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
That’s like saying if interstate highways were such a good idea, then why didn’t the private sector build them? This kind of infrastructure requires massive economies of scale to be cost-effective, the kind of cash outlay that can only be funded by a government. The private sector will jump in as soon as the potential for profit becomes clear, but right now there is too much uncertainty to privately invest that kind of money. Nobody’s saying that solar and wind are single-handedly going to solve our energy problems, but they’ll certainly make a large dent.
justm399 on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
No, not at all. If the big oil companies had not suppressed the development of alternative energy for so many years we would have had a lot more. And Americans were just fine with allowing big oil to control things because prices have been ridiculously low.
jehen on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
Well – first you are wrong. There are many commercial wind farms and have been for years. There are no economically practical commercial applications for Solar Photovoltaic but there are operating solar thermal power.
Form Siemens – a very profitable commercial company you can buy power generation a solar thermal steam turbine power plant – they have an operational one in Nevada.
There are dozens of utilities selling their wind power now and the there are more installations every day.
Second – no one says or claims that these alternatives – Wind and Solar are universal and will work anywhere. That’s like saying hydro Power is no good because there are no mountains, high dams or water falls in florida.
Jacob W on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
Funny how some people believe that "big oil" is preventing this technology from becoming available. There is no "big oil". These companies are actually "big energy". They would love to provide our energy at a profit no matter what the source of that energy. But windmills are not the answer because they are too expensive, require too much area, make too much noise, kill birds and bats, cannot function without wind and cannot function with too strong a wind.
Solar requires too much area, too much maintenance and sunny skies. They block the sun from reaching the ground and adversely affect the ecosystem in that way. Both of these technologies produce energy that is erratic and unreliable. They also create energy storage problems that other sources do not.
Sure, they will play a role in our future but they are not the answer. The answer is much more likely to be nuclear power but we are not taking any major steps in that direction yet. Instead we are wasting money on the wong things like, solar, wind, ethanol and bio-diesel. These may will play a small role but they are not worth massive infusions of money.
Energy companies are all doing plenty of research into these and other alternative sources. None of them wants to be left behind if a breakthrough occurs. But, it may never occur. That is why we need to build nuclear reactors and build a lot of them.
*
BamaFireFighter523 on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
There are private utility companies that are powering entire cities with windmills. There is a city in Missouri that is powered solely by windmills. The only reason why is because the wind is constantly blowing there. It’s common sense, you wouldnt put a hydroelectric dam on a small creek. You can only use natural resources where they are present.
Natural power sources are unpredictable, thats why they arent used very much. People pay a lot for electricity and dont want it cutting out whenever there is rain or whatever. Man-made power sources are more reliable because they are man-made and we have control over the on/off button.
And overall, nuclear isnt a clean resource. Granted, may not have as large as a carbon footprint as, say coal, for instance. The energy it takes to refine uranium, the energy and resources it takes to manufacture vessels for containment, decon, and storage of the byproducts. Mountains have to be carved out to make space for nuclear waste disposal and has to stay there for thousands of years. Think about the resources it takes to carve out a mountain or any underground structure for storage of these waste materials.
I work around nuclear nuclear materials at an army base and nuclear containment is one of the big budget items and takes a lot of resources. I aint doggin nuclear energy or anything. It accounts for like 60% of the energy in the grid where I live and have a nuclear plant about 30 miles from here. It certainly gets my vote but I wouldnt call it clean.
gman on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
The technology currently does not make solar or wind energy economical. Hopefully, in a few years, advances will make them more and more efficient. The first car engines got only 1 mile to the gallon, now they can get about 50 and are able to propel the vehicle 10 times faster. It took about 100 years to do this however. So ideally these will work as there is virtually no additional pollution after production, but for now oil or nuclear based energy is the way to go.
stratm663 on November 9, 2009 at 11:52 am
wow, ya know weve landed on the moon? there were poeple like you then. they all said. cant do it….nope, wont work, we dont have the technology, yada yada. it works. it has for 40 yrs. the problem is not that it doesnt work. the problem is that the conglomerates dont want us off the grid. its their money. jeez, put the cup down,and step away from the kool aid…step away from the kool aid…
you obvioulsy have no engineering background or acces to anyone who does. and (water cooled) nuclear? where does the waste go ? hmmm? i can tell you…can you tell me?
RDustin on November 9, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Science: energy content of sunlight and moving air is very low (no matter the location). Energy content of moving water, hydro-carbons & atoms is high.
Politics: “From the crooked timber of human nature nothing straight was ever built.” (Sir Edmund Burke)