Horace Heffner wrote: > > The IEA is suggesting a $45T program and over $1T/yr to cut carbon > emissions 50% by 2050. See: > > http://www.iea.org/Textbase/press/pressdetail.asp?PRESS_REL_ID=263 > > This is on the order of the $26-33T, $1.5T/yr, and 20 yrs I predicted > in 2005 would take for 100% conversion. See: > > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BigPicture.pdf > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/EnergyCosts.pdf > > However, that projected cost was for 100% elimination of carbon fuels. > > The primary difference is the IEA plan relies on 32 new nuclear > plants each year:
... It appears most people just don't expect what is even already in the > works in solar energy development. Hi All, We need to hedge our bets, since for national security reasons we must stop using rock oil NOW! This means making methanol and diesel (including biodiesel) our national liquid fuels -- we have the coal to do it, from the Mississippi to the Rockies. Nuclear, wind, and hydro power should be in the mix, especially if Yellowstone blows and the Sun is blotted out for several years. Jack Smith
