From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Jul 30 2002 - 10:03:51 MDT
--- Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> Curt Adams posted:
> <<The spokeswoman's response was somewhat evasive -
> something like "we
> believe
> the energy needs of the US would be best met only by
> wind power".
>
> If hers is a minority opinion in GP, I stand
> corrected. >>
>
> Yes, if the engineers at Green Peace can show the
> world their new,
> wind-powered car, or bus, or train; it would be a
> top news item. I am sure
> those plucky activists are busy day and night,
> developing alternative
> vehicles and power sources.
They want, of course, for huge windpower farms (though
not anywhere near their own backyards, or near any
cute and fuzzy animals that appear in their fund
raising campaign materials) to generate electricity to
power electric cars and to produce hydrogen fuel.
THey have latched onto wind power because it's cost
per kwh has dropped to market competetive levels in
the last decade, so that they can no longer be reviled
as pie in the sky goofballs who can't count dollars
and cents. I still think they are pie in the sky
goofballs because there are not enough locations in
the country that would meet their squeaky clean green
approval to meet even a significant fraction of the
country's power demands.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:47 MST