Laughingman wrote:Thanks for chiming in Terrie
I'm don't know exactly what the costs are to supply wind energy in place of coal or even better nuclear. What I do know is that our government is subsidizing the cost of wind and solar power to encourage expansion. So it is unlikely that our bills will go down over time. They are just trying to reduce the immediate impact till they gain enough public support. Fair enough, we voted them in. Just don't expect the cost of energy to go down... At least until cold fusion is invented...
The real challenge is balancing the load. We have a huge differential between daytime use and night time use. This means our infrastructure needs to be able to fullfil the highest demands during the day but needs to scale back during the night... That's the problem with nuclear, its not scalable over short periods of time. Solutions are not easy or obvious.... But be prepared to spend more or use less, that is our future
Terrie, that is very concerning, as it is now we can see the flashing lights of the turbines on the Michigan side, so much for our pristine Lake front.tkettlepoint wrote:Pete no problem my friend...
look what i just found ... look off KP, PF, GB
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], knotwindy, Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests