At 11:13 AM 4/5/5, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >You can use electricity from windmills or silicon to >refine the materials needed to make more windmills (or solar cells).
Say, wasn't there an innovative solar cell manufacturer in Australia that was going to convert their factory to all solar powered? As I recall they had invented an unusually efficient solar cell. I wonder how that is progressing. Maybe Robin van Spaandonk, who posted the original material on this, can update us on that? It seems to me undeniably true that if the world is converted to all renewable energy (wind, solar, wave, water, hydrothermal, bio), that the above conclusion would be obvious. Based on material I posted earlier, it appears this is not only feasible but the most economical approach long term, especially if accomplished in a global fashion. The unit cost of renewables will ultimately beat the unit cost of nuclear by a large factor. However, the needs of the United States are so immediate and defense related that I have to agree with Jones that every possible energy source must be developed here as soon as possible, including nuclear. An equally vigorous conservation program is needed as well. We need people of vision in Washington, people who have an accurate concept of the future as well as the world's perception of the United States. We need people unafraid to change their positions. We need people who are not completely beholden, who possess both the ability and drive to perceive the difference between actions required of them necessary to the lives of the people and the continued existence of the country vs obligatory political pork that merely redistributes wealth among the states. Pork might even be a good thing. However, the consequences of political pork are nearly inconsequential compared to the inability of leadership to distinguish the truly critical actions and to take them. From my perspective, the vision is apparently muddy, and as the vision clears the political will is weakend and action delayed, possibly as a result of present campaign finance laws. It is only when the situation is glaringly clear, nearly without controversy, and the need pressing in the extreme, that significant action with regard to energy is likely to occur. Here's another perspective. Suppose a drive by some major group to build lots of nuclear plants actually occurred. Maybe the rationale for building the plants combined with the inevitable backlash would be sufficient to get something done with regard to renewable energy and conservation. The majority of the American public at this point is completely asleep at the wheels - asleep at the steering wheels of gas guzzlers that is. Maybe that's just exactly what is needed - a big drive for nukes! What an appropos thread name, except maybe it should be all caps! WE ALL NEED MORE NUKES NOW! A NUKE IN EVERY CITY, A NUKE IN EVERY BACK YARD, A NUKE IN EVERY GARAGE. GET YOUR NUKES NOW! GET YOUR CHEAP NUKES, NOW MANUFACTURED IN CHINA AND SOLD BY WALLMART! Excuse me. I'm getting dizzy on this soapbox. I'd better step down. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner
