> Even depending on methane alone, the amount of economically
> viable natural gas is stupendous; and the non-conventional sources are
Staggering? Heck, they wouldn't be staggering so much if them fool kids
wasn't out all night tippin' 'em over! ;)
> The other source, wind energy, has the possibility of supplying all USA needs
> -economic viability set-asside, momentarilly.
Moving parts, exposed to dust, rain, and freezes, are tough to keep
working. Massive use of wind power *will* have at least local climate
effects, which are very poorly understood--studies have been done in,
e.g., Illinois about the effects of art projects on wind patterns. The
butterfly effect is annoyingly real.
> Why are photovoltaics and
> fusion always 10-20 years away? My guess is that nobody has seriously
> challenged the physicists, and chemists who have touted these 'alternatives'.
No, they retire, and new ones take over, saying "This time for sure!"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:22 MDT