Orr

Wind Power Can Solve the U.S. Oil Addiction

Nuclear power is half the cost of wind ?

Some of the problems with nuclear power is that it has numerous legacy costs that are on-going - so-called waste. I have never received a straight answer on whether or not weapons-grade plutonium can be used effectively in a nuclear reactor. Some articles speak around this but the problem is nuclear power works with material that requires special handling and processing, special technology and has all sorts of hidden costs. It requires heavy government involvement. The other problem is that it requires enormous amounts of water for cooling.

Wind and solar do not generate all these waste problems, can be integrated easily within existing infrastructures (rooftops for solar and farms for wind) and DO NOT USE WATER.

Remember - "water is the next oil".

Electricity is the the next fuel. There is off-the-shelf technology that could be used on our interstates whereby electric trucks could use an electric rail as a power source - just like an electric train on tires. Coupled with a small diesel motor to power the vehicle on/off the interstate would enable very fast transport on existing highways with no need for heavy batteries at all.

The main impediment of both solar and wind is the need for political cooperation between different parts of the country to enlarge the grid. A very large grid with internet-like self routing behavior (matching demand and supply in a dynamic, fluctuating state) would connect the variations in electric power generation from the renewable sources to the variations in power consumption...

The notion that we cannot build a very large grid coupled with concentrated solar and wind within say 10 or 20 years is simply not true. Go visit Germany and see the vast, complex electric train infrastructure already in-place. They will likely be completely oil free within 40 years.