There is a very real problem in the USA right now in the development and deployment of alternate energy into the grid, as the country fights amongst itself over how energy will be generated, distributed, and managed in the future. This is especially the case with solar, as it continues to mature in both energy conversion efficiency as well cost effectiveness to become a more and more attractive source of energy. Even now, when all costs are factored in, solar is now more cost-effective than some fossil fuels in many cases.

The problem is that the debate about how the USA will generate and distribute energy is being driven by ideology, not science or economics. Entrenched business and political interests are blocking solar in many ways, from condemning research expenditures to outright legislation designed to restrict the development of solar energy as a viable supplement to the nation’s growing power needs. Even much of the mainstream media is buying into the lie that solar power is not viable.

This is not only a foolish attitude, but it is ignorant of both history and market forces. In every single case where a solid-state technology was developed to address an application area, it eventually came to dominate that space. Solar is no different, and conversion efficiencies are such that it is obvious to all but the most in denial that solar is not only a viable, but a cost-effective technology. In the marketplace, American neo- and pseudo-Luddites completely forget that this is now a flat earth, and if we do not develop and deploy these technologies others will, and they will wind up dominating those future markets…

A future smart grid that properly integrated all viable alternate energy technologies would not only result in a significant reduction of dependence on fossil fuel and the resulting ecological impact (which is rarely calculated, and never accurately), but it would also create many well-paying infrastructure jobs from electronic engineers to electricians, and everything in between…

This won’t happen, at least not in any decent fashion, unless we as a country stop basing our arguments on ideology and vested interest instead of what is best for the country, its citizens, and its future. Only by properly deploying a truly smart grid that integrates all manageable types of energy with the proper controls and safeguards, including security, will the USA reach the full potential of what such an infrastructure can provide.

Alix Paultre is the only person I know who can explain quantum physics well enough for me to understand. Well, for about five minutes anyway.

Follow the link, read his editorial, read the magazine he edits.



  1. John E Quantum says:

    Solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal energy sources still do not equal the amount of energy that could be saved by advanced conservation practices. Huge amounts of energy are wasted heating, cooling and illuminating all of our buildings, apartments and houses. Conservation will be the number one way we reduce our use of fossil fuels in the near future. Additional reduction in fossil fuel use won’t be possible until we change our transportation paradigm.

  2. MikeN says:

    Switch to nuclear energy. This will likely not have much in the way of Republican opposition.

    • ± says:

      It will have both R and D opposition if it is done properly. i.e. different than it is done now.

      Bechtel will throw 100s of millions of dollars towards keeping the nuclear industry the way it is (inefficient and dangerous) instead of incorporating all the knowledge attained in the last 60 years to do it right. And instead of going with truth and what is best for everyone, the D/Rs will suck up the proffered money and vote it down.

      [stupefying platitude, easily avoided]

      • Tim says:

        Why give people free energy, when you can make billions of dollars to say your ‘working on it’. Besides, bobbo would just use it to promote a carbon tax, somehow…

    • Tim says:

      a coil of glass filled with tritium. a coil in the same arrangement as the cfls. the coil is the secondary of a transformer. the fusion. it shines.

    • Tim says:

      “”The team then turned to the AEC, then in charge of fusion research funding, and provided them with a demonstration device mounted on a serving cart that produced more fusion than any existing “classical” device. The observers were startled, but the timing was bad; Hirsch himself had recently revealed the great progress being made by the Soviets using the tokamak. In response to this surprising development, the AEC decided to concentrate funding on large tokamak projects, and reduce backing for alternative concepts.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor#Work_at_Farnsworth_Television_labs

      Again… it’s never going to be revealed unless it’s big State as the provider. little timmy making fusion makes little timmy dead fast by feds… so, little timmy concentrates on gasseous tube devices that, when energized {albeit, only for microseconds}, explodes into a pure mass/energy conversion to x-rays.

      little timmy smokes a lot of dope.

  3. Tim says:

    Will there be any stars in my crown???????????????

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=2A7Au0j2jdI

    none, that any of ya’ll will be left alive to blog about.

  4. bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

    While this thread is worn out, I’ll post here, and again no doubt.

    Humans ability to think about /conceptualize the future is unique in the animal kingdom. If you want to say squirrels hide nuts… ok … we can think about it better than squirrel do. All part of our Big Brain advantage.

    Moyers and Co had part two of “War on Climate Scientists” with David Suzuki on last night, to play again this week on PBS. I remarked many of his science buds are convinces our species is “done.” co2 is gonna get us in the coming or next century. He hold out hope that “if we did something now” that maybe it could be avoided. Hmmm…. a FAINT HOPE for something that isn’t even happening…

    Gives me no joy at all and my Big Brain says we are all doomed.

    So, for the first time I googled (global warming, end of manking) and found all sorts of negative stuff. As one would if one googles any negative issue like (global warming is a liberal fraud to restrict our freedom)==see how that works? Google gives us what we want.

    I am going to google some more specifically on “Official Positions Papers” of Shell Oil and the like. Surely those human beings want their grand kiddies to have a future?….. evidently not though.

    The whole issue to me is like the Scientists who are paid to look for Earth Orbit Crossing Asteroids. Imagine they report they found one that will hit the Earth in One Week from Now….. verses 150 years from now. Sadly, to alter the course of the Asteroid, Earth will have to have multi-national agreement to spend ALL our aggregated capital to remove this threat ((This is a hypothetical!))

    I assume if the asteroid were to hit next week, we would destroy our economies to save ourselves. But 150 years from now? What would the opposition be?

    1. Earth has been hit by meteors before and the Earth is still here.
    2. Those scientists are biased and will lose their grants/jobs if they don’t make these threats up.
    3. Destruction by Asteroid hit was predicted in 1947 and they were wrong.
    4. You can’t prove the asteroid will hit because there are too many unknowns even if you believe in Newtonian physics.

    Its just an analogy.

    But far too accurate.

    Silly Hoomans.

    • Tim says:

      “”Sadly, to alter the course of the Asteroid, Earth will have to have multi-national agreement to spend ALL our aggregated capital to remove this threat

      not so much. ya’ll fascists need to get the fuck up out of my face and let me do my thing.

      Apophis

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        Timmmy===pulling my chain is something of which I will not up with put. I know you know what a hypothetical is. Certain relevant facts removed in order to draw attention to the others.

        But you are a clever rascal. Of course, world economies would not be at risk to avoid an asteroid strike. But other than that……

        I had momentarily forgotten you are a Science Denier on the Issue of AGW which is a close tangent of this thread.

        I would RIGHT NOW impose an additional $1/gal/basket on oil and coal right now with a phase in of another $50 over the next 50 years (a dollar a year rise). THEN I would let market forces figure out the best econimic response.

        I would also have a MASSIVE FED FUNDING program for all things Green: ie–whether they work or not. Good science, good social policy.

        Would this BANKRUPT GOUSA????…. why not, aren’t we already? Ha, ha.

        I know Science Deniers are bad at judging ideas by weighing the pros and cons of all propositions. They like to identify ONE snappy characterization and avoid all the necessary condiments. Hoomans are silly that way.

        HEY===90% of our grandkiddies are all going to die from the impact of AGW. 50% change all human life will be exterminated. It all depends on how much MOMENTUM is built up before we throw the engine into reverse……………sic ………… can’t even do that.

        Thats what I’m interested in now…. Once it is accepted that AGW IS HERE (as it is) what can actually be done to reverse it?

        I’d still think that some kind of atmospheric co2 removal process will be the ticket. Turning it into a solid or stable liquid of some kind and pumped into old mines. My oft stated nuclear bombs set off in the Sahara to throw dust in the air==Totally Extreme and wouldn’t actually help if co2 is still being put in the air.

        So yeah….. all of us here will probably miss it… but eventually the forehead will get smacked, and then the fun will begin.

        I do think there will be “solutions” in the EXTREME to avoid our species annihilation, whether they are taken up…… hard to say. Too easy to lose the ability to make a billion co2 converters before the H2S is off gassed.

        You know gas. Never pleasant.

        • Tim says:

          I was talking about the asteroid and how beurocracies will not be able to divert it. But, just to shut you up,…. have you checked the orbit, lately???

          I wouldn’t want to get caught breaking any zoning laws, or anything; best just to put things back like i found them.

          • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

            Well Timmy, you need to reverse course in your approach/emulation of Norman, the Babbling Dane.

            Be more direct, more on point. Less dithering, tangents, and misanthropic rants.

            I do wonder/worry about how many of your ideas have been formed solely from the vacuum you have created around you so.

            Contact.

          • Tim says:

            fuck Danish synchrotrons. always, the epoxy melts from neutron moderations.

            It all depends on how much MOMENTUM is built up before we throw the engine into reverse

          • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

            I would F*@K the Dane, in a friendly consensual way of course, BUT===you stand too close to him. I might miss and screw the pooch so to speak.

            That would not be proper.

            Mind the gap.

  5. bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

    Yep, a year ago on this forum I proposed another hypothetical: we have found a “Magic Spigot” from which all the coal and oil we want is delivered for free. What would be the prime question?” to this I will now add Natural gas.

    Turns out, this hypo is not hypo…. its REAL. That dot established last month when it was found that some maximum tipping point of humanity will be achieved if we burn up more than 30% of the proven reserves we have now.

    This came home on tonights episode of “Years of Living Dangerously.” All about how through “leakage” the production and use of Natural Gas is many times more damaging to the atmosphere than is coal or gas. Currently being touted as “The Answer” for cheap/Clean energy. Seems that clean methane is dirty than clean coal. Who’d a thunk it?

    So…………… how we gonna save ourselves when The Answer is to pump even worse poison into the Atmosphere?

    See the point?===once you start denying one part of Science, you gotta deny a whole bunch more or Science===because it all knits together into the Knowledge of Man. Ain’t that a Bitch? ((Hint: yes, politics based on the denial of vast swaths of Science is going to cause our own demise.))

    How can we get an open letter to Bill Gates to STOP WASTING HIS $$$$ on getting more people on Planet Earth when the First and Primary issue facing us is: How can we heat, clothe, feed and transport ourselves without shitting into our drinking water?

    GREEN ENERGY!!! The only issue that matters, all else being secondary AND dependent. GAWD DAMN….. going nuts does give one an empowered feeling. Those religious loons are on to something.

    Yea, verily.

    • MikeN says:

      Nuclear energy is quite green and is already an established and mature industry. They just need greenies to get out of the way.

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        Well Mickey….. you’ve posted that about 3 times now. Demonstrate a reactor that burns up ALL its own waste, and I’ll agree with you.

        THEN all you have to factor in is the huge gubment subsidies and waivers from Liability these big corporate owned and operated CENTRALIZED targets of terrorism represent, and make your decision.

        I say: your head is as far up your ass as it always is.

        Got a link to clean nuke technology: DEMONSTRATED? Or do you remain totally irrelevant?

    • Tim says:

      “”How can we get an open letter to Bill Gates to STOP WASTING HIS $$$$ on getting more people on Planet Earth

      Bill Gates is a eugenicist; his ‘vaccines’ have a nasty habit of sterilizing black girls and otherwise castrating anyone that isn’t bill gates. He single-handedly brought about the resurgence of polio in India.

      And, he’s also why i no longer pay attention to TED talks:

      CO2 = P x S x E x C.

      P = People
      S = Services per person
      E = Energy per service
      C = CO2 per energy unit

      Then he adds that in order to get CO2 to zero, “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero.”

      http://naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html

      http://nsnbc.me/2013/05/08/bill-gates-polio-vaccine-program-caused-47500-cases-of-paralysis-death/

      May he jam his philanthropy up your ass gently — roll around in flour, the gap’s there somewhere.

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        Well Timmy, all looks good. Is there anything about the equation that escapes you? Green Energy has close to ZERO C OR CO2 created per energy unit delivered. Just EXACTLY what is needed.

        If Bill Gates’ $$$ is giving people polio, ((link must have multiple typos as it says non-polio disease spiked thus causing polio?))…. ALL the more reason to waste that money on something productive, like SAVING ALL OF MANKIND rather than those too poor to read the product inserts.

        Yep….. I’m fully possessed of myself. Smells like a good day.

  6. bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

    Short two page read on the benefits of Thorium Reactors:

    http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-breakout-thorium-global-idINBRE9BJ0RR20131220

    Looks like it is about 40 years late right now to come on line? Non-radioactive Green Energy to be far superior once it starts to beat coal on even/Steven basis.

    So like Big Business to be mired in the solutions of the past that weren’t pursued for reasons we have forgotten.

    Mining for the Thorium probably as dangerous or more than mining for uranium, coal, oil etc?

    Green Energy. Its GREEN!!!!!!!!! See the difference?

    • MikeN says:

      So on the one hand you say humanity will be either completely wiped out, civilization will end, only pockets of humans will remain,
      and on the other hand nuclear energy that could be implemented and prevent this might have a few problems of a lower scale.

      It’s pretty obvious that you are not really worried about global warming.

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        Mickey………. really?

        You are Pedro stupid?????

        STFU.

    • Tim says:

      It does sound like a better way, doesn’t it?

      There are two problems, though. They can’t make nuclear bombs from the byproducts. The reactors can be very small — operated by an individual small.

      Thorium is what was in coleman lantern mantles and it is not perfectly clean —

      particularly Radium-224. Because of the very short half-life, it quickly replenishes from its radio-parent (Th-228) and every new heating of the mantle to incandescence releases a fresh flush of radium-224 into the air, which can be inhaled if the mantle is being used indoors, producing an internal alpha-emitter radio-toxicity concern. This was the subject of a federal suit against the Coleman Company (Wagner v. Coleman), which initially agreed to place warning labels on the mantles for this concern, and subsequently found a superior alternative to Thorium. Secondary decay products of thorium include radium and actinium.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_mantle#Thorium

      The reactor cannot run away or melt down under its’ own power — it must be continuously illuminated by moderated (slowed down) neutrons — these neutrons can be produced by amature enthusiasts at home without radionuclide use. However, they’ll still pop you if you’re storing up or otherwise enriching it to produce other radionuclides…

      how to make green energy in the kitchen of your mom..

      the radioactive boyscout

      “”His “reactor” was a bored-out block of lead, and he used lithium from $1,000 worth of purchased batteries to purify the thorium ash using a Bunsen burner.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        Yeah, it does sound plausible but I have heard mention of this for decades now. There must be issues that prevent its development LIKE==the cost/location/problems of digging up the raw materials and purifying it to production use?

        And the linked article never said definitively that it has been demonstrated. Just a bunch of if’e and ought to’s.

        IRRESPONSIBLE……… if clean Nuke as describes actually is possible and it wasn’t pursued for all this time. Now?===we have DECENTRALIZED alternatives.

        • Tim says:

          “And the linked article never said definitively that it has been demonstrated”, uttered bobbo

          “”Energy from thorium is not just scientific theory. On April 25, Thor Energy, a private Norwegian company, began producing power from thorium

          “”the U.S. government also built an experimental molten salt reactor using U-233 fuel, the fissile material created by bombarding thorium with neutrons. The reactor, built at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, operated critical for roughly 15000 hours from 1965 to 1969

          “”in 1973, however, the U.S. government shut down all thorium-related nuclear research—which had by then been ongoing for approximately twenty years at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The reasons were that uranium breeder reactors were more efficient, the research was proven, and byproducts could be used to make nuclear weapons

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power#Background_and_brief_history

          Again, if there were any technology empowering to the individual, or individual municipalities that does not take giant government/corporations then that solution will not be countenanced by the US.

          decentralization is never going to happen, if they have their way about it: Dupont wrote it down years ago as one of the tenets of the new industrial society where its’ social acceptance is forced through taxation —

          Distribution networks must be simplified…. {that is, cram everyone into compact cities}

          They don’t like competition — especially when it is not their business model.

          • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

            Good quotes. Too bad only one is from the link I gave…. and if you read the first two paragraphs of that link, it sounds a whole lot more iffy. Even the one quote that applies standing alone is iffy in full: “Energy from thorium is not just scientific theory. On April 25, Thor Energy, a private Norwegian company, began producing power from thorium – named after the Norse god of thunder – at the Halden test reactor in Norway.” /// A test reactor. Lots of ideas work in a test laboratory but don’t scale to commercial use.

            I think while you may be right utilizing your other links, you are being somewhat …… what?…… dishonest or sloppy of my own summation.

            Always good to read more to get a better picture.

            Everything stays the same until it changes. DECENTRALIZED power production will happen. Its called: change.

          • Tim says:

            “”A test reactor. Lots of ideas work in a test laboratory but don’t scale to commercial use.

            Yea. That’s why our aging parents preffere a gocart to the latest toyotas…

          • Tim says:

            Yea. it scales DOWN to individual empowerment… sorry to bust your co2 tax scheme, if i decide to flaunt some zoning laws…

        • Tim says:

          “”Here’s the new concept. Thorium could be used in conjunction with a laser and mini turbines to easily produce enough electricity to power a vehicle. When thorium is heated, it generates further heat surges, allowing it to be coupled with mini turbines to produce steam that can then be used to generate electricity. It is said that 1 gram of thorium produces the equivalent energy of 7,500 gallons of gasoline.

          “”when silvery metal thorium is heated by an external source, it becomes so dense its molecules give off considerable heat.

          Small blocks of thorium generate heat surges that are configured as a thorium-based laser, Stevens tells Ward’s. These create steam from water within mini-turbines, generating electricity to drive a car.

          A 250 MW (I think this is a typo, they probably mean KW – Anthony) unit weighing about 500 lbs. (227 kg) would be small and light enough to drop under the hood of a car, he says.

          http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/13/hey-how-much-thorium-you-got-under-the-hood/

          ——————-

          One gets mad that we don’t have these things. One gets madder realizing why. One gets really outraged listining to fools harp on co2 without ever questioning why the government/corporations give a shit {no, they are not concerned about their ‘children’}.

        • Tim says:

          There must be issues that prevent its development LIKE==the cost/location/problems of digging up the raw materials and purifying it to production use?

          Hmm. “”It is found in small amounts in most rocks and soils, where it is about three times more abundant than uranium.

          Incidentally, lead is about equally abundant as uranium, from whence it came…

          Nope, the problem is one of control over the individual, or loss thereof, dominance of large corporate structures, or loss thereof, american imperialism empowered by a stranglehold on petroleum, or loss thereof. period.

        • Tim says:

          Earth, ‘Gia’ to libtards, diddled around with natural nuclear reactors — pulse reactors, that.

          “”One theory proposes that the uranium was covered with groundwater, which moderated the neutrons and provided an environment that supported a chain reaction. The energy generated eventually heated the groundwater to boiling, and it steamed away. With the groundwater gone, the reaction stopped.

          http://gizmodo.com/there-s-a-naturally-occurring-nuclear-fission-reactor-i-1475445638

        • Tim says:

          “”when silvery metal thorium is heated by an external source, it becomes so dense its molecules give off considerable heat.

          This statement is liable to cause some consternation. I understand. But, consider that water transitions from least dense {it floats} to most dense at 37 degrees farenhiet — releasing much heat {80 cal/gram} in the process.

    • MikeN says:

      You know electric cars were built more than 100 years ago. So if 40 years for thorium means its a no-go, then perhaps we should ditch electric as well.

      • Tim says:

        If i can use it to heat my vaporizer, then it is evil and should only be used by

  7. MikeN says:

    We have seen existing nuclear reactors do very well for a large population, pretty much all of France, 20% of the US, increasing in China and India. If this were such a failure we wouldn’t see it increasing so much. The French example suggests even 100% is possible, while renewables excluding hydro are looking like a 10% max and that’s probably being generous.

    • Tim says:

      MikeN, I will assume that you’d not be so amiable to it if it were doable by the individual, and not multi-billion projects??? Hmmm??

      • MikeN says:

        Why? It actually is doable by individuals. Kodak had a secret nuclear reactor running for decades that no one knew about until about 10 years ago. I doubt they spent billions on it.

        Japan is experimenting with neighborhood level pebble bed reactors.

        • Tim says:

          “”I doubt they spent billions on it.

          Well, maybe to keep it a secret… Na, there are all kinds of small research reactors scattered all over the place. Cherenkov {optical effect analogous to a sonic boom} indegoness is the shizzle.

  8. moss says:

    Meanwhile, the point made by Elon Musk continues apace. There are no industries reliant on solid state devices where average prices go anywhere but down.

    And as many years as I supported nuclear power generation, costs continue to rise.

    I’ve been getting quotes from local competing solar panel installing companies for a couple weeks, now. Prices range from custom designed-for-the-siting at the top of purchase prices to packaged systems trucked in, hooked up and leased for ~$25/month more than my current electric bill. A fixed monthly price for 25 years and no escalator clauses…which means real dollar savings start in 2-3 years as charges for utility-based electricity continue inevitably higher. For the next 25 years.

    The other phenomenon is that everyone in my neck of the prairie is catching on. Every firm queried has a backlog/minimum of 2 months lead time to install.

    • MikeN says:

      The electricity prices are rising because of renewable energy mandates, and other restrictions placed o fossil fuel energy by the green zealots.

  9. MikeN says:

    >Yeah, it does sound plausible but I have heard mention of this for decades now. There must be issues that prevent its development

    The same can be said for solar and wind.

    • Tim says:

      tl;dr , But, at least, Coulter’s mandated hormone replacement therapy is starting to bear some fruit.

      Silent Running — the end
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rt_fQvavqEA

    • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

      Years of Living Dangerously on showtime last night had a study about fracking. Seems it is releasing 15 times the amount of methane the industry claims thereby making it dirtier than coal.

      GO GREEN!!!!

      • NewFormatSux says:

        Methane is not dirty.

      • NewFormatSux says:

        If you are claiming that methane is dirty because of some link to global warming, then the answer is ‘go nuke’, or if you prefer, ‘Go Thor’

        • Tim says:

          Actually, a pet musing of mine from time to time is that we did miss our ‘eden’ period of interglacial this time around because of man’s actions.

          That is to say, that this time around trees were cut down and burned, releasing co2 instead of the natural course of them laying around and rotting, generating much CH4 which is a far better greenhouse gas than co2, even when factoring in it’s persistance in the atmosphere.

          naturally, the great tree die-off to start with would have been due to the iceages caused by ….wait for it…. a deficiency of co2.

          • Tim says:

            Let me expand on that idea just a little — Our form of life is based on carbon. At the base of it all, that carbon comes from CO2 {photosynthesis}.

            Life will build up to meet the available levels of that gas. However, man has severely constricted where and how the life likes to be.

            Consider the suburban environment/lawns — essentially all biological activity is stopped there, especially in the winter. Most are lucky if they have a large tree, and that’s a small part of an energetic biosphere.

            So, the co2 would be expected to build up a little bit, but we’re never going to get warm enough and back to the ‘eden’ that so threatens the powers-that-be in the first place.

          • Tim says:

            clarification:

            the deficiency of CO2 is not to be interpreted as the direct cause of the cooling, but rather the resulting diminished output of CH4 due to lower biosphere energy.

      • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

        So…. is methane dirty or not?

        • bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

          Sorry …. too quick.

          Yes…. when ANYONE says methane is dirty it means it is a very powerful green house gas: 700 times more powerful than co2 gas.

          Yes, in this sense, Nuke is clean. Its just dirty by other definitions as in its radioactive waste.

          Regardless, my point on Nuke would be that it makes no sense to CONCENTRATE AND CENTRALIZE a hazard like Nuke Power Plants or waste storage facilities that then become subject to terrorist attacks when GREEN ENERGY allows for a distributed system that is not the subject of a terrorism attack. Two birds with one stone so to speak.

          But “right now”—I agree==>anything is better than coal and oil and methane or any other green house gas creating process.

  10. bobbo, Big Brained Apes with Lizard Emotions is an Evolutionary Dead End says:

    Tim says:
    5/22/2014 at 8:34 pm

    Let me expand on that idea just a little — Our form of life is based on carbon. At the base of it all, that carbon comes from CO2 {photosynthesis}. /// Carbon comes from nuclear fusion within stars that explode thereby distributing that and other elements into the universe for use in other natural processes including but not limited to nor “from” co2. Basic Science.

    Life will build up to meet the available levels of that gas. However, man has severely constricted where and how the life likes to be. /// Gibberish. The concentrations of different gases notably co2 vs oxygen does affect how many of what kinds of animals can exist on planet Earth mostly due to the interaction with food sources. Methane appears from time to time affecting all those equations sometimes resulting in the production of H2S which again at certain levels will actually kill off most forms of multi-cellular life. Lots of variations and interactions only generallly referred to there. Again, Basic Science.

    Consider the suburban environment/lawns — essentially all biological activity is stopped there, especially in the winter. Most are lucky if they have a large tree, and that’s a small part of an energetic biosphere. /// Whats your point? Most o2 comes from algae in the ocean. Quite a bit from Jungles which are disappearing. Lawns?

    So, the co2 would be expected to build up a little bit, but we’re never going to get warm enough and back to the ‘eden’ that so threatens the powers-that-be in the first place. /// Gibberish again…. whats your point more clearly expressed? I’m guessing here: that the amount of co2 and o2 will stabilize to a narrow constant range based on the energy input to the earth. Its mans activities that are changing the variable elements to ranges that upset the standard rations that normally only change very slowly over time based on solar input….. blah, blah, blah.

    Its Science.