Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> Even depending on methane alone, the amount of economically
> viable natural gas is stupendous; and the non-conventional sources are
> staggering.
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!"
MMB
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:22 MDT