Wednesday, September 15, 2004

Wind Vs. Nuclear

Slashdot sings the praises of wind power today:
Even without further expected improvements in turbine technology, the U.S. would now need to use less than 3% of its farmland to get 95% of its electricity demand satisfied by wind power.

Of course this is all hooey. This Spectator article points out some of the faults with wind power (i.e., it's not always windy), as well as the obvious solution for future electricity supplies:
The European Commission's Marina II study recently concluded that North Sea oil and gas operations now contributed more man-made radioactivity to the seas of northern Europe than anything emanating from the nuclear industry.
...
Looking for a clean and comparatively cheap, environmentally friendly source of power? Assuming the rogue scientists Pons and Fleischman got it wrong [which they did], and cold fusion is indeed nothing but a chimera, there is only one answer to our energy problems, and sadly it is not a serried rank of windmills just off the Norfolk coast.

No comments: