Re: Electric Sonex

On Jul 27, 1:43 pm, "Peter Dohm" <lefty...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<veedu...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1185519278.641261.68700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Meaning no offense to you personally, but I just don't believe it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------



Neither did we :-)

At that time licenses had been issued for about thirty nuke plants in
addition to those already under construction. I don't think a single
one of them was ever funded. I'm sure there were other factors
besides being brain-washed by a cartoon but when I heard about it at a
weekly status meeting I recall the odd looks I got when I asked what
he meant by 'the Simpsons.'

During that same period I recall the tree-huggers getting in a tizzie
over a coal fired plant in the midwest when the utility erected
hyperbolic cooling towers. (All that radioactive steam, you know.)

Turns out, the typical American isn't quite as bright as most people
think. Just look at the people we elect to high office :-)

I recently heard a fellow touting the glories of solar & wind over the
horrors of those terrible old tea-kettles. It took only a moment to
figure out his numbers were based on a photo-voltaic array that was
100% efficient. ( His wind turbines were equally efficient. And the
wind apparently blew all the time :-) Trying to interject a whiff of
reality into such discussions is treated with polite condescension at
best. After all, everyone knows wind & solar is good, whereas nukes
are evil.

What I find remarkable is that such massive ignorance is often the
product of a college education. Some recently published texts
continue to cite the Carrizo Plains PV project as the cutting edge of
solar technology despite the fact that facility was dismantled years
ago after its output fell so low it couldn't even power its own
tracking needs let alone feed anything into the grid. (A fact you can
confirm using satellite photos available on the internet. But of
course, that can't be right :-)

I hear Crystal Power is a good investment. That, and Electric
Aeroplanes :-)

-R.S.Hoover

What really annoys me about the college gang, much more than the 100%
efficiency foolishness, is their 100% acceptance of statements from their
trusted sources--even when it clearly contradicts their own personal
observations.


Uh huh. Consider, for example, the widely-held misconception that
nuclear power plants are more energy efficient than fossil fuel
plants.

--

FF


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Can Nuclear Power Deliver?
    ... >power, and the efficiency of a combined cycle plant falls off rapidly as the ... A wind farm would need several units, ... >> Continued large scale burning of fossil fuels will DROWN their ... >from base load plants. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Nuclear Power
    ... wind, since you will not be able to site nuclear power plants ... Vogtle site it was originally set up for two more plants. ... fact that so many nuclear plants failed to block simulated terrorist ... Things like this make me doubt the feasibility of nuclear power, ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Wind chill, fleece etc.
    ... then an air temperature of say 2C with a wind chill of say -3C ... >>doesn't actually mean plants will freeze (assuming they would anyway ... >long period of the same temperature. ...
    (uk.rec.gardening)
  • Re: OT: Wind farm NIMBYs
    ... share of its electrical demand by wind farms. ... What he is referring to is the necessity to have of peak-load plants ... of the wind-generated electricity is transferred to Germany, ... In addition there is a Compressed Air Energy ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Thank An Enviromentalist / Democrat
    ... Not building more nuclear power plants ... Power generators lost interest in nuclear generation after TMI. ... Only because the eco-liar movement had successfully used BS-science lawsuits to ... They tried to get a few plants in operation ...
    (rec.autos.driving)