Slashdot Mirror
Green Energy Almost Cost-Competitive with Fossil Fuels
js7a writes "As reported in the Houston Chronicle, the sharply rising cost of natural gas and other fossil fuels has caused the cost of renewable energy to finally reach the price of nonrenewables. However, wind still has some catching up to do: 'a 10 percent wind- and 90 percent water-generated mix is about $9 per month less expensive than the 100 percent wind plan.' As more wind generation and grid transmission capacity is built, wind will eventually become more competitive than hydroelectric, but hydro and other sources will be required to balance grid demand in calm areas. Slashdot has been following this trend."
So, where are all the dams going to go that will supply 90 % of our power?
How many species of fish will they wipe out (snail darter, anyone?) in the building and operation of them?
What about the disruption of microclimates caused by the introduction of new lakes where there were only streams before?
What about the wetlands that would be disrupted, either by drying out or being flooded (see "new lakes" above)?
It's amazing people still call hydroelectric power "green", but then hypocrisy in defense of liberal ideas is no vice...
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
what happens when you slow down HUGE amounts of air moving in low altitudes? Could this have an effect on the environment just as destructive as that posed by other energy sources?
William George
Dude, they have always hated us, get over it
This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
Look at your receipt when you buy a light bulb at Home Depot. I am SURE you will see you are already paying sales tax on the bulb.
So... your point is...?