Comments on: Kinder: wind, solar not the answer to U.S. energy needs

By: indeed

indeed — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:14:40 +0000

yeah its the hydroelectric capacity that represents the largest amount of ‘renewables’. Yet, all hydro capacity has been tapped.

By: Survivor?

Survivor? — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 10:08:47 +0000

The Reuters article re First Solar project in China is interesting.
Too late to buy shares?
The Chinese seem to prefer national self sufficiency where possible, rather than needing a “global reach” (at what cost?) to obtain energy resources.
But large scale research and production will give a big lead in 21st century energy while America lives off its 20th century road and oil investment.

By: Joe Serhan

Joe Serhan — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:34:19 +0000

Well, I dont understand why so much talk about, I think we should follow Mr Kinder advice, as well as push as hard as we can with the solar and wind development, down the road our only availability is nuclear, solar and wind.

By: Boom

Boom — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:20:38 +0000

Well monica Ill be sure to bring up clean coal next month when my town meeting (in western PA) adresses what were going to do about the incredibly high levels of mercury that have been found in the stream that feeds our water plant.

Intrestingly enough there seems to be a mercury plum down wind from the local coal plant the Bush’s buddies upgraded with clean coal tech.

By: eron

eron — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:17:00 +0000

wow, just wow.

Pretty much:
I own stocks in atomics, Atomic power is “teh KEYZ”
I have intrests in GW’s bushes “clean” coal, coal is teh anwser!

Im an oil baron, Oil is teh answer!1!!!!!

Come on already…

By: f belz

f belz — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 04:16:55 +0000

I think that wind and solar are good, but I put my money on Geothermal. New Zealand does about 70% of its power generation with geothermal. Geothermal is available in many locations and is a constant heat source with no burning of fuel and is just there for the using. What we dearly need is a method of energy storage where we can level the load, plus we need a new grid for power distribution.

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:54:28 +0000

Would someone please tell me how carbon dioxide, which is plant food, is a pollutant?
We breathe it out, plants breathe it in. Plants need carbon dioxide to survive. Without it they will die. If we had no CO2 in the atmosphere, we would freeze to death. This is a power grab by big government to control our lives. Don’t be fooled.

By: Solar Power

Solar Power — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:06:33 +0000

Great post! Thank you for posted this…

By: Monica from ACCCE

Monica from ACCCE — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:04:17 +0000

Why not consider clean coal technology?

A lot of people don’t know exactly what clean coal technology is, so I’ll fill you in: it refers not to any one technology, but to an entire suite of advanced technologies.

During the America’s Power Factuality Tour, we’ve been traveling around the country talking to the people who are behind the production of cleaner electricity from coal – including a stop at the Pleasant Prairie Power Plant in Wisconsin. They’ve installed a retrofit system that has reduced nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent and sulfur dioxide emissions by 95 percent.

In addition, through a pilot project in partnership with Alstom Power, they’re developing the latest in carbon capture technology. Check out http://sn.im/factuality5 to get the facts on clean coal technology once and for all.

By: Voice of Reason

Voice of Reason — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:11:38 +0000

all of the above approach to energy…put them all on the table in a fair marketplace without coal and oil having an unfair advantage and let’s have an energy race in this country!

why are oil, coal and natural gas the only choices for energy sector investment on the exchange?

why not list all of the challengers too…and let’m make their pitch to the consuming public…that is fair play…talk about free market…get the other guys thumb off the scale and perhaps we may accomplish something