I’m all in favor of lifting the ban, I just think it’s smoke and mirrors to accuse the other side of something our side is equally guilty of. It’s not Repub vs. Dem, it’s politicians vs. the rest of us.

…puts us at the mercy of foreign producers, “many of whom want to destroy us.”

Did you miss the post on wind and solar just a couple up from yours?

No, but I was also talking about hydro-power as an alternative, which you happily ignored.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=34898
Geo-thermal would also be good, but like hydro its limited by geography.

what about the million pounds of bird poop that get splattered on those solar panels?

All in all, solar power is fools power.

Absolutely. Unfortunately the Congress is made up largely of lawyers who are basically know-nothings when it comes to serious issues that require a foundational knowledge in science and economics. And they are failing miserably as serious representatives who shuold take it upon themselves to learn the facts and not operate on the same base emotional level as their constituents. Whatever happened to reason?

I notice that you are assuming the panels will move. This will take energy. Moving 100,000 acres of solar panels will require some serious horsepower, which will have to be supplied by the solar panels. As a rough guess, you are going to have to increase the save of your array by 10 to 20%.

So now we are up to 120,000 acres of solar panels to replace one nuclear power plant.

As one moves further north, you will need more panels to acheive the same amount of power.

As one leaves the desert, you will need more panels to compensate for the increased cloudiness.

All in all, solar power is fools power.

, and wind are probably never going to be efficent enough

Did you miss the post on wind and solar just a couple up from yours?

They’ve also got to talk about nuclear and alternatives. Off-shore hydro-power, solar, and wind are probably never going to be efficent enough (compared to fossil and nuclear power)for the whole country, but having a diverse energy infrastructure only makes us more secure. And they should also talk about energy security, not just in terms of supply, but distribution security. Improving infrastructure, adding capacity, hardening against EMP threats, running lines underground to prevent storm/falling tree damage, etc.
If the current crisis between Georgia and Russia show us anything, its how vulnerable the west is to energy security threats. Especially as Russia could EMP us.

DerKrieger on August 12, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Whats really funny is the group that will kill solar energy??? Environmentalists…

You have to cover LARGE areas with solar panels to get the desired amounts of energy… and under those panels NOTHING can be growing… no plants, no animals, nothing.

The cry will be things like “think of the desert tortoise”…

I don’t need to do the math for wind energy, you can find it here. Suffice it to say the 3.2 GW in the previous solar example I posted would require an area measured in hundreds of square miles, not square acres.

Every time the libs talk about the oil shale in the West, they paint a picture of trickling mountain streams and pristine landscape.

Trust me folks, it ain’t all that.

No, it ain’t

Trust me folks, it ain’t all that.

Second look at DeMint!