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
Cold fusion is improbable.
Renewable energy will be 70-80% of our energy by 2050.
Now in terms of subsidies...the oil has been indirectly subsidized in the US for a very very long time. The current subsidy of windfarm is negible compared to the oil industry subsidy.
Actually even wihtout subisitdy windfarms are economically sustainable with current energy prices., however the cost is mainly upfront, and people are hesitant to to stuff their cash there...so the government steps in.
If you are really interested in this, check out the numbers in this article:
http://www.nei.org/corporatesite/media/ ... 0-2010.pdf
i've added an easy to read table of numbers